UNDERSTANDING PROVERTY IN THE PHILIPPINES
October 2001. The Population Commission (Popcom) said there are 30.6 million Filipinos or 6.12 million families who are suffering from poverty. I took consolation with the notion that we are not alone, yet this dismayed over the complacency of our national government officials who seem undisturbed by the fact that 40 percent of their constituents live below the poverty line throughout the country's 78 provinces, 84 cities or 41,940 barangays. How can they sit back and relax?
There are about 77 million Filipinos today, and this number is growing by 2.05 percent annually. This means that some 1.5 million Filipinos are born every year, 600,000 of whom to poor parents. Some 32.5 million Filipinos, comprising 66.3 percent of the population, are considered matured enough to work. But 3.3 million of these people, or 10.1 percent of the workforce, cannot find jobs while 5.2 million others, or 17.7 percent, have no regular source of income.
By international standards, these are critical problems. The Taiwanese government is in the brink of panic, because the unemployment rate in that country just north of Luzon is threatening to hit 5 percent, year-on-year. Yet, our Filipino government officials are sitting relaxed inside posh restaurants and five-star hotels, as 8.5 million Filipinos or 28 percent of the workforce are trying to figure out where to source the next meal for their families.
According to the World Bank, the Philippines had a per capita GNP of US$1,050 in 1999, compared to China's US$780, Indonesia's US$600, Vietnam's US$370, Lao's US$290 or Cambodia's US$280. Yet, the Philippines' poverty incidence rate of 40 percent is higher than China's 3 percent, Indonesia's 23 percent, Vietnam's 37 percent, Lao's 38 percent or Cambodia's 36 percent. Why is that? Wealth in the Philippines is concentrated on the hands of the few, that's why. It is the World Bank, and not the NDF, which gave such explanation.
Now consider this, the prestigious Forbes magazine has included at least five Filipinos in the list of world billionaires (US dollars). Let us rejoice! Imagine, highly industrial and welfare states like France, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden do not have a single representative to the billionaires' circle.
Among Southeast Asian countries, poverty incidence is most extreme in the Philippines where some 15.3 million Filipinos (half of the poor population) wake up every morning without food on the table. These people are called subsistence individuals or whose income cannot provide for basic food requirements. Popcom's data is even conservative because in its interpretation, a family of six earning a total of P72,000 a year is not considered poor. In contrast, a study conducted by the National Wages and Productivity Commission (NWPC) pegged the minimum income that a family of six must earn annually at P191,874 in order to live decently in Metro Manila.
The labor sector has been demanding for a P125 daily wage hike or 50 percent of the current level but the group of employers claimed that such wage adjustment would force many establishments out of business. Listening more to the rhetoric of the rich rather than to the howl of the poor, the Regional Tripartite Wage Board has approved only a P30 daily wage increase in the metropolis. The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) event want us to believe that the previous minimum daily wage of US$5 (P250) in Manila is much higher than China's US$1. Ironically, the Philippines reported a poverty incidence rate of 40 percent, much higher than China's 3 percent.
What makes things more difficult for us is the high prices of commodities. The country's inflation rate, estimated at 6 to 7 percent annually, is the highest in Asia. Japan, a super rich country, is ironically having a deflation.
Let us make some computation. A person who is covered by the minimum wage would not take home P250 a day. Most likely, the wage, after tax and pension deductions, on top of travel and meal expenses, would amount to something like P150. A person who passes by a fastfood center, which is not in anyway a luxurious restaurant, might spend at least P50, or 33 percent of his take-home income on a roll of rice and a fried chicken wing. That explains his purchasing power. Imagine spending all of your daily income in just three meals at an inexpensive restaurant. Food is supposed to account for less than 20 percent of a man's expenses.
While it might be true that a P125 daily wage adjustment will be bad for business (the Central Banks warned it would push inflation rate to 18 percent), this might be the only option that the poor has against poverty. Unless the government can do something like bringing the prices of food and other basic commodities, there is no other recourse but to increase the poor's purchasing power. The government needs to do its own computation, and put some system in managing the affairs of the nation.
Sadly, it seems that our government officials haven't learned anything from the past. Only last year, about 500 people were killed when a 50-meter pile of garbage collapsed on their makeshift houses in a dumpsite in Quezon City. This was the absolute face of poverty, whose image failed to instill understanding among our numb leaders. Now, who could blame the 20,000 protesters who stormed to Malacanang Palace last May 1. The people in the media, who were not even aware on what the attack was about, had the guts to brand these protesters a mob of poor and undisciplined warriors.
It also seems that the current crop of leaders have nothing to offer, and one opposition senator even admitted that in 30 years, the Philippines will not even reach the level of Thailand, which I understand, is still a poor country. This is anything but encouraging. Imagine spending the next 30 years of your life in poverty (if the tension in Central Asia does not lead into another world war, of course). We wait for a day that one leader will rise to change our mindset and status in life. Someone who will promise to turn the Philippines into a country of mostly rich people in his lifetime and can convince us that he really can.
THE CAUSE OF PROVERTY IN THE PHILIPPINES
Poverty
- Poverty in the Philippines
- Causes for poverty in the Philippines
- Some solution that can solve the poverty in Philippines
- Reasons and solutions for poverty for most countries such as India and other countries suffering from widespread poverty
One of the most recent questions tonight is:
"Some solution that can solve the poverty in Philippines"
To answer that question we first need to analyze sincerely but critique the various causes for poverty in the Philippines as well as in most other countries.
Poverty can be manifold - poverty in the Philippines can be divided by priority into following causes:
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by laziness to work harder and more hours
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by lack of quality consciousness
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by lack of love FOR God and thus FOR all his children on earth
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by abuse by rich ones
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by mismanagement of government due to lack of sincere interest for the benefit of ALL
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by social injustice created by mankind / industry / money world / investors / rich ones
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by accidents / disasters / war / political instability
- Poverty in the Philippines caused by personal karma.
From one perspective, poverty is a function of total output of an economy relative to its population--GNP per capita--and the distribution of that income among families. In the World Bank's World Development Report, 1990, the Philippines was ranked at the lower end of the grouping of lower middle-income economies. Given its relative position, the country should be able to limit the extent of poverty with a reasonably equitable sharing of the nation's income. In fact, the actual distribution of income was highly skewed (see table 12, Appendix). Although considerable underreporting was thought to occur among upper-income families, and incorrect reporting from lack of information was common, particularly with respect to noncash income, the data were adequate to provide a broad overview.
In 1988 the most affluent 20 percent of families in the Philippines received more than 50 percent of total personal income, with most going to the top 10 percent. Below the richest 10 percent of the population, the share accruing to each decile diminished rather gradually. A 1988 World Bank poverty report suggested that there had been a small shift toward a more equal distribution of income since 1961. The beneficiaries appear to have been middle-income earners, however, rather than the poor.
The World Bank report concluded, and many economists associated with the Philippines concurred, that the country's high population growth rate was a major cause of the widespread poverty, particularly in the rural areas. Implementation of a government-sponsored family-planning program, however, was thwarted by stiff opposition from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church (see Population Control , ch. 2). Church pronouncements in the late 1980s and early 1990s focused on injustice, graft and corruption, and mismanagement of resources as the fundamental causes of Philippine underdevelopment. These issues were in turn linked to the concentration of control of economic resources and the structure of the economy. Land ownership was highly unequal, but land reform initiatives had made little progress.
In urban areas also, the extent of poverty was related to the concentrated control of wealth. Considerable portions of both industry and finance were highly monopolized. Access to finance was severely limited to those who already possessed resources. The most profitable investment opportunities were often in areas in which tariff or other forms of government protection ensured high profits but did not necessarily result in rapidly expanding employment opportunities. In her election campaign President Aquino pledged to destroy the monopolies and structures of privilege aggravated by the Marcos regime. She looked to the private sector to revitalize the economy, create jobs for the masses of Filipinos, and lead the society to a higher standard of living. The state-protected monopolies were dismantled, but not the monopoly structure of the Philippine economy that existed long before Marcos assumed power. In their privileged positions, the business elite did not live up to the President's expectations. As a consequence, unemployment and, more importantly for the issue of poverty, underemployment remained widespread.
ACTIONS TAKEN TO FIGHT POVERTY IN THE PHILIPPINES
THERE ARE CAMPAIGNS, and there are campaigns. have. From mobilizing for students rights and welfare to anti-US military bases, from indigenous people’s right to self-determination to freedom from East Timor, from fund raising for ailing activists and artists to peace campaign for Mindanao.
But the Stand Up, Take Action campaign has a different take. One, it is competing against itself to break the Guinness Book of World Records for the most number of people who stood up against poverty; second the need to coordinate the actions of various people’s movements and governments, and consolidate these efforts; third, the follow through, meaning building up from what has been achieved to perhaps set an even bigger record next year.
And we are not talking of the discourse yet as to how breaking the Guinness record can actually end poverty!
But the persistence of the global organizers and the enthusiasm of the people’s movements all over will spell the difference. The GCAP experience in the Philippines runs along the same course.
The 50-50 Campaign
The 50-50 campaign was a product of the brainstorming of the coordinating committee in July. It took its cue from World Vision’s 50 Little Things, a guide book for children on how to help make a better Philippines.
Coalition members readily agreed to seek personal commitments to end poverty and submit these to the government as testimonies of a people wanting to end poverty, and demand from the government to fulfill its promises .
Interestingly, after the agreement in the CC level, Chona Ramos of SENCA informed us of the international campaign In My Name which is similar in many ways to our 50-50 campaign. At least, we are confident we are in the same wavelength !
The Philippine secretariat took the initiative to draft the content of the sign up form, passed it to CC for deliberation , editing and approval.
When the forms were out, we noticed a slow turn in of signed-up forms. It was then we realized there’s just too much text in the form, and demands too much to read and tick off. But it is too late to change. We complemented it with an online petition and a Facebook cause invitation
Meanwhile, on the ground, coalition members continued to gather signatures. By the evening of October 17, Stand Up day, here are the figures we gathered (including figures from World Vision and UNYAP:
* 50-50 sign up forms - 26,462
* Facebook - 790
* Online Petition - 187
Mobilization
Preparations for the October 17 mobilization started Monday, 13 october, the International Day of Action Aghainst Debt and IFIs when GCAP-Phils partnered with Freedom from Debt Coalition for a round table discussion on Debt and Climate Change.
This was followed by street mobilization on October 16, World Food Day with some 200 people demanding government program for food sovereignty and sustainability. In the afternoon of the 16th, GCAP also took part in a round table discussion organized by ODA Watch.
On Day 1 of Stand Up Day, October 17, some 1,500 fisherfolk and supporters from GCAP marched to and picketed the Department of Agriculture. The picket dramatized the fisherfolk’s demand to scrap the free trade agreements, specifically the recent one with Japan (JPEPA).
Simultaneous with the picket, the youth organized a sign-up campaign in a public high school in Quezon City and gathered 1,871 signatures. Down south, youth volunteers also in Cagayan de Oro also organized their own sign up centers and gathered 2,751 signatures.
In the evening, some 2,000 plus people gathered at the Liwasang Bonifacio for the finals of the Rap Against Poverty competition, back to back with Palag Na! an anti-VAT concert. Prior to the competition, we had a showing of the video Missed Targets, produced earlier by GCAP and Social Watch on the failure of the Arroyo government to meet its promises to the poor.
On Saturday and Sunday, artists involved in the rights and welfare of the indigenous peoples organized an art camp. Some 5,000 attended the two whole day event.
Media
Notice for the rap finals saw print in two tabloids and a major daily. The National Coordinator was interviewed over the ABS-CBN News Channel (ANC) in the morning of October 17 with two rappers (significantly, the two won top prize) and over dzBB, a radio station in the afternoon.
Likewise the signature campaign gained the support of local movie and television celebrities
The Stand Up Take Action Day also merited solidarity messages from two Senators, Loren Legarda and Mar Roxas. Both are rumored to be eyeing the presidency in 2010.
Projection and Continuity
While Stand Up Day is over and done with, the campaign for the eradication of poverty continues, and will now build up for the December Human Rights Day.
The signature campaign will continue until we reach the target one million signature. The rap music composed by the finalists will be produced in an album (with additional songs, also talking of poverty eradication, by members of the board of judges).
But first, we need to get back to the list of those who signed up to thank them and maintain relationship with them, at least through online communications to keep them in the loop of the anti-poverty advocacy.
EDUCATION
IN
THE
PHILIPPINES
EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES
In 1991 the education system was reaching a relatively large part of the population, at least at the elementary level. According to 1988 Philippine government figures, which count as literate everyone who has completed four years of elementary school, the overall literacy rate was 88 percent, up from 82.6 percent in 1970. Literacy rates were virtually the same for women and men. Elementary education was free and, in the 1987 academic year, was provided to some 15 million schoolchildren, 96.4 percent of the age-group. High school enrollment rates were approximately 56 percent nationwide but were somewhat lower on Mindanao and in Eastern Visayas region. Enrollment in institutions of higher learning exceeded 1.6 million.
Filipinos have a deep regard for education, which they view as a primary avenue for upward social and economic mobility. From the onset of United States colonial rule, with its heavy emphasis on mass public education, Filipinos internalized the American ideal of a democratic society in which individuals could get ahead through attainment of a good education. Middle-class parents make tremendous sacrifices in order to provide secondary and higher education for their children.
Philippine education institutions in the late 1980s varied in quality. Some universities were excellent, others were considered "diploma mills" with low standards. Public elementary schools often promoted students regardless of achievement, and students, especially those in poor rural areas, had relatively low test scores.
The proportion of the national government budget going to education has varied from a high of 31.53 percent in 1957 to a low of 7.61 percent in 1981. It stood at 15.5 percent in 1987. The peso amount, however, has steadily increased, and the lower percentage reflects the effect of a larger total government budget. Although some materials were still in short supply, by 1988 the school system was able to provide one textbook per subject per student. In 1991 the Philippine government and universities had numerous scholarship programs to provide students from low-income families with access to education. The University of the Philippines followed a "socialized tuition" plan whereby students from higher income families paid higher fees and students from the lowest income families were eligible for free tuition plus a living allowance.
Historical Background
Many of the Filipinos who led the revolution against Spain in the 1890s were ilustrados. Ilustrados, almost without exception, came from wealthy Filipino families that could afford to send them to the limited number of secondary schools (colegios) open to non-Spaniards. Some of them went on to the University of Santo Tomás in Manila or to Spain for higher education. Although these educational opportunities were not available to most Filipinos, the Spanish colonial government had initiated a system of free, compulsory primary education in 1863. By 1898 enrollment in schools at all levels exceeded 200,000 students.
Between 1901 and 1902, more than 1,000 American teachers, known as "Thomasites" for the S.S. Thomas, which transported the original groups to the Philippines, fanned out across the archipelago to open barangay schools. They taught in English and, although they did not completely succeed in Americanizing their wards, instilled in the Filipinos a deep faith in the general value of education. Almost immediately, enrollments began to mushroom from a total of only 150,000 in 1900-1901 to just under 1 million in elementary schools two decades later. After independence in 1946, the government picked up this emphasis on education and opened schools in even the remotest areas of the archipelago during the 1950s and the 1960s.
Education in the Modern Period
The expansion in the availability of education was not always accompanied by qualitative improvements. Therefore, quality became a major concern in the 1970s and early 1980s. Data for the 1970s show significant differences in literacy for different regions of the country and between rural and urban areas. Western Mindanao Region, for example, had a literacy rate of 65 percent as compared with 90 percent for Central Luzon and 95 percent for Metro Manila. A survey of elementary-school graduates taken in the mid-1970s indicated that many of the respondents had failed to absorb much of the required course work and revealed major deficiencies in reading, mathematics, and language. Performance was poorest among respondents from Mindanao and only somewhat better for those from the Visayan Islands, whereas the best performance was in the Central Luzon and Southern Tagalog regions.
Other data revealed a direct relationship between literacy levels, educational attainment, and incidence of poverty. As a rule, families with incomes below the poverty line could not afford to educate their children beyond elementary school. Programs aimed at improving work productivity and family income could alleviate some of the problems in education, such as the high dropout rates that reflected, at least in part, family and work needs. Other problems, such as poor teacher performance, reflected overcrowded classrooms, lack of particular language skills, and low wages. These problems, in turn, resulted in poor student performance and high repeater rates and required direct action.
Vocational education in the late 1980s was receiving greater emphasis then in the past. Traditionally, Filipinos have tended to equate the attainment of education directly with escape from manual labor. Thus it has not been easy to win general popular support for vocational training.
Catholic and Protestant churches sponsored schools, and there were also proprietary (privately owned, nonsectarian) schools. Neither the proprietary nor the religious schools received state aid except for occasional subsidies for special programs. Only about 6 percent of elementary students were in private schools, but the proportion rose sharply to about 63 percent at the secondary level and approximately 85 percent at the tertiary level. About a third of the private school tertiary-level enrollment was in religiously affiliated schools.
In 1990 over 10,000 foreign students studied in the Philippines, mostly in the regular system, although there were three schools for international students--Brent in Baguio and Faith Academy and the International School in Manila. These schools had some Filipino students and faculty, but the majority of the students and faculty were foreign, mostly American. Faith Academy served primarily the children of missionaries, although others were admitted as space was available.
Chinese in the Philippines have established their own system of elementary and secondary schools. Classes in the morning covered the usual Filipino curriculum and were taught by Filipino teachers. In the afternoon, classes taught by Chinese teachers offered instruction in Chinese language and literature.
In 1990 the education system offered six years of elementary instruction followed by four years of high school. Children entered primary school at the age of seven. Instruction was bilingual in Pilipino and English, although it was often claimed that English was being slighted. Before independence in 1946, all instruction was in English; since then, the national language, Pilipino, has been increasingly emphasized. Until the compulsory study of Spanish was abolished in 1987, secondary and highereducation students had to contend with three languages--Pilipino, English, and Spanish.
In 1991 all education was governed by the Department of Education, Culture, and Sports, which had direct supervision over public schools and set mandatory policies for private schools as well. Bureaus of elementary, secondary, and higher education supervised functional and regional offices. District supervisors exercised direct administrative oversight of principals and teachers in their district. There was a separate office for nonformal education, which served students not working for a graduation certificate from a conventional school. Financing for public schools came from the national treasury, although localities could supplement national appropriations.
Education policies fluctuated constantly and were likely to be changed before teachers became accustomed to them. Areas of disagreement among Filipinos produced educational change as one faction or another gained control of a highly centralized public education administration. One example was the community school program that sought to involve schools in agricultural improvement. It was pushed vigorously in the 1950s, but little has been heard about it since. Another policy issue was the choice of a language of instruction. Until independence, English was, at least in theory, the language of instruction from first grade through college. The emphasis on English was followed by a shift toward local languages (of which there were eighty-seven), with simultaneous instruction in English and Pilipino in later grades. Then, at least in official directives, in 1974 schools were told to drop the local language, and a bilingual--English and Pilipino--program was adopted.
One of the most serious problems in the Philippines in the 1980s and early 1990s concerned the large number of students who completed college but then could not find a job commensurate with their educational skills. If properly utilized, these trained personnel could facilitate economic development, but when left idle or forced to take jobs beneath their qualifications, this group could be a major source of discontent.
POVERTY
IN
THE
PHILIPPINES
THE CAUSE OF MISSEDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES
The education in general helps us work , but lets take from other point of view , if most of the philpino people don't study , the country is going to face a problem where the demanded skills dont match the skills available with the people , therefore too unemployment will result in less country output or economical output ...
ACTIONS TAKEN TO PREVENT MISSEDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES
APEC Education Forum - "Education Ministers from 14 member economies of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) met in Washington in 1992 August at the invitation of the United States. They agreed to form an APEC Education Forum within APEC's Human Resources Development Working Group and to coordinate joint activities in the field of education. APEC itself was formed in 1989 as a new mechanism for multilateral cooperation among the economies of the Asia-Pacific Region"
# Aquinas University of Legazpi
# Asian Institute of Management
# Ateneo de Cagayan de Oro
# Ateneo de Manila University
# Ateneo de Naga
# Ateneo de Zamboanga
# Bicol University - in Legazpi City, this is the State University
# Cebu Normal University
# Center for Philippine Studies, University of Hawai'i (USA) - established in 1975 in recognition of the faculty strength and other academic resources on the Philippines at the University of Hawai'i, and of the contributions of Filipinos to the development of Hawai'i. It is the only academic institution in the United States offering a program of instruction, research, and outreach devoted to the study of the Philippines and over Filipinos
# Central Luzon State University
# Central Philippines University
# Central Visayas Polytechnic College - the State College in Negros Oriental, Dumaguete City
# De la Salle University
# Filipinas Heritage Library - "a knowledge network of the nation, the Library is a gift to the country from the Ayala Group of Companies for the Philippine centennial. Formerly located at Ayala Museum, the Library opened to the public in 1996 at the historic Nielson Tower"
# International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR) - improves the quality of life of the rural poor in developing countries through rural reconstruction: a sustainable, integrated and people-centered development strategy generated through practical field experience
# International Rice Research Institute - a nonprofit agricultural research and training center established to improve the well-being of present and future generations of rice farmers and consumers, particularly those with low incomes. It is dedicated to helping farmers in developing countries produce more food on limited land using less water, less labor, and fewer chemical inputs, without harming the environment. IRRI employs about 975 scientific and support staff members, 88% of whom are Filipinos. About 115 scientists are recruited internationally; about half of them are from developing countries
# Mindanao State University, Iligan Institute of Technology
# Misamis University
# Philippine Institute for Development Studies - a nonstock, nonprofit government research institution engaged in long-term, policy-oriented research. It was established on September 26, 1977 by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 1201. Through its activities, it hopes to expand policy-oriented research on social and economic development so that it can directly assist the government in planning and policymaking
# Philippine Studies Association of Australia - Australian and Philippines experts studying all aspects of the development of the Philippines; the site provides insight in their history, achievements, and activities; interesting resources
# Philippine Women's University
# Philippines Studies Directory of Japan - plus links to researchers in the United States of America
# Saint Louis University, Baguio City
# Silliman University, Dumaguete City
# Social Weather Station - "established in August 1985 as a private non-stock, nonprofit social research institution. Its members, called Fellows, are social scientists in economics, political science, sociology, statistics, market research, and other fields"
# Technical Education and Skills Development Authority - "a major thrust of TESDA is the formulation of a comprehensive development plan for middle-level manpower based upon a National Technical Education and Skills Development Plan. This plan shall provide for a reformed industry-based training program that includes apprenticeship, dual training system and other similar schemes"
# University of Batangas
# University of the East
# University of the Immaculate Conception, Davao City
# University of Nueva Caceres
# University of the Philippines at Diliman
* Center for Local and Regional Governance
* Institute of International Legal Studies
* Research Dissemination & Utilization Office of the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Development
* School of Urban and Regional Planning
# University of the Philippines at Los Baños
# University of the Philippines at Manila
* College of Public Health
* National Teacher Training Center for the Health Professions (NTTC-HP)
* School of Health Science
# University of the Philippines: Open University
# University of the Philippines in the Visayas
# University of San Carlos, Cebu City
OVER POPULATION
IN
THE
PHILIPPINES
UNSERSTANDING THE OVER POPULATION IN THE PHILIPPINES
Population Growth
The Philippine population in the early 1990s continued to grow at a rapid, although somewhat reduced rate from that which had prevailed in the preceding decades. In 1990 the Philippine population was more than 66 million, up from 48 million in 1980. This figure represents an annual growth rate of 2.5 percent, down from 2.6 percent in 1980 and from more than 3 percent in the 1960s. Even at the lower growth rate, the Philippine population will increase to an estimated 77 million by the year 2000 and will double every twenty-nine years into the next century. Moreover, in 1990 the population was still a youthful one, with 57 percent under the age of twenty. The birth rate in early 1991 was 29 per 1,000, and the death rate was 7 per 1,000. The infant mortality rate was 48 deaths per 1,000 live births. Population density increased from 160 per square kilometer in 1980 to 220 in 1990. The rapid population growth and the size of the younger population has required the Philippines to double the amount of housing, schools, and health facilities every twenty-nine years just to maintain a constant level.
Migration
There were two significant migration trends that affected population figures in the 1970s and the 1980s. First was a trend of migration from village to city, which put extra stress on urban areas. As of the early 1980s, thirty cities had 100,000 or more residents, up from twenty-one in 1970. Metro Manila's population was 5,924,563, up from 4,970,006 in 1975, marking an annual growth rate of 3.6 percent. This figure was far above the national average of 2.5 percent. Within Metro Manila, the city of Manila itself was growing more slowly, at a rate of only 1.9 percent per annum, but two other cities within this complex, Quezon City and Caloocan, were booming at rates of 4 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively.
A National Housing Authority report revealed that, in the early 1980s, one out of four Metro Manila residents was a squatter. This figure represented a 150 percent increase in a decade in the number of people living in shantytown communities, evidence of continuing, virtually uncontrolled, rural-urban migration. The city of Manila had more than 500,000 inhabitants and Quezon City had 371,000 inhabitants in such neighborhoods. Moreover, rural-urban migrants, responding to better employment opportunities in peripheral metropolitan cities such as Navotas, had boosted the percentage of squatters in that city's total population.
A second major migration pattern consisted of resettlement from the more densely to the less densely populated regions. As a result of a population-land ratio that declined from about one cultivated hectare per agricultural worker in the 1950s to about 0.5 hectare by the early 1980s, thousands of Filipinos had migrated to the agricultural frontier on Mindanao. According to the 1980 census, six of the twelve fastest growing provinces were in the western, northern, or southern Mindanao regions, and a seventh was the frontier province of Palawan. Sulu, South Cotabato, Misamis Oriental, Surigao del Norte, Agusan del Norte, and Agusan del Sur provinces all had annual population growth rates of 4 percent or more, a remarkable statistic given the uncertain law-and-order situation on Mindanao. Among the fastestgrowing cities in the late 1970s were General Santos (10 percent annual growth rate), Iligan (6.9), Cagayan de Oro (6.7), Cotabato (5.7), Zamboanga (5.4), Butuan (5.4), and Dipolog (5.1)--all on Mindanao.
By the early 1980s, the Mindanao frontier had ceased to offer a safety valve for land-hungry settlers. Hitherto peaceful provinces had become dangerous tinderboxes in which mounting numbers of Philippine army troops and New People's Army insurgents carried on a sporadic shooting war with each other and with bandits, "lost commands," millenarian religious groups, upland tribes, loggers, and Muslims. Population pressures also created an added obstacle to land reform. For years, there had been demands to restructure land tenure so that landlords with large holdings could be eliminated and peasants could become farm owners. In the past, land reform had been opposed by landlords. In the 1990s there simply was not enough land to enable a majority of the rural inhabitants to become landowners. International migration has offered better economic opportunities to a number of Filipinos without, however, reaching the point where it would relieve population pressure. Since the liberalization of United States immigration laws in 1965, the number of people in the United States having Filipino ancestry had grown substantially to 1,406,770 according to the 1990 United States census. In the fiscal year ending September 30, 1990, the United States Embassy in Manila issued 45,189 immigrant and 85,128 temporary visas, the largest number up to that time.
In addition to permanent residents, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, more than half a million temporary migrants went abroad to work but maintained a Philippine residence. This number included contract workers in the Middle East and domestic servants in Hong Kong and Singapore, as well as nurses and physicians who went to the United States for training and work experience, a fair proportion of whom managed to become permanent residents. The remittances sent back to the Philippines by migrants have been a substantial source of foreign exchange.
Population Control
Popcom was the government agency with primary responsibility for controlling population growth. In 1985 Popcom set a target for reducing the growth rate to 1 percent by 2000. To reach that goal in the 1990s, Popcom recommended that families have a maximum of two children, that they space the birth of children at three-year intervals, and that women delay marriage to age twenty-three and men to age twenty-five.
During the Marcos regime (1965-86), there was a rather uneasy accommodation between the Catholic hierarchy and the government population control program. Bishops served on Popcom, and the rhythm method was included by clinics as a birth-control method about which they could give information. A few Catholic priests, notably Frank Lynch, even called for energetic support of population limitation.
The fall of Marcos coincided with a general rise of skepticism about the relation between population growth and economic development. It became common to state that exploitation, rather than population pressure, was the cause of poverty. The bishops withdrew from the Popcom board, opposed an effort to reduce the number of children counted as dependents for tax purposes, secured the removal of the population-planning clause from the draft of the Constitution, and attempted to end government population programs. Attacks on the government population program were defeated, and efforts to popularize family planning, along with the provision of contraceptive materials, continued. In the early 1990s, however, the program generally lacked the firm government support needed to make it effective.
CAUSE OF OVERPOPULATION IN THE PHILIPPINES
Comment on Government and Church initiative regarding overpopulation:
Overpopulation is and should be everyone's concern. It's not something that we should blame only on the poor or the government or especially only on those who have seemingly taken God's directive to "go forth and multiply" to heart.
In 1970, Philippine government launched the Philippine Population Program (POPCOM) and later the National Family Planning Program. According to my research, the Catholic Bishop's Conference of the Philippines had repeatedly opposed the proposal of the government regarding the use of articial method to control the issue on population growth.
Even if there are numerous programs that the government will propose, Roman Catholic would still oppose those proposals because it’s against their teachings and the scriptures. Catholic Church in the Philippines preaches against abortions and other types of contraception. The government can't change the way they think and their stand on these issues. They even said that they won't give communion to those social workers that promote the use of condoms and other birth control methods. I believe that they are not "close- minded" individuals, they just settle for the safest way in alleviating overpopulation.
However, they could be other ways to solve the overpopulation issue. One is through education about pregnancy and its prevention. The government should make programs that would educate the people especially, the poor families on how to have good family planning. I propose that they also educate teenagers on the consequences of unwanted pregnancy and pre-marital sex. Lack of education is one of the leading causes of overpopulation. Instead of corrupting the nation's money, they should allocate it to programs that would make the lives of its nation better. Another is through creating jobs to numerous unemployed Filipinos. Overpopulation is closely related to poverty. The government should provide the Filipinos with jobs that they have proimised for them to earn an income sufficient enough to meet the needs of the members of the family.
The biggest cause of overpopulation in the Philippines is the lack of education. People there don't have the knowledge on how to use a 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 it's citizens.
The biggest cause of overpopulation in the Philippines is the lack of education. People there don't have the knowledge on how to use a 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 it's citizens.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment