2001年-世界发展银行全球_Philippines___Poverty_Assessment_Volume_1_Main_Report_74页_6mb

Summary of the Philippines Poverty Assessment (Volume I)

Core Content

This report provides an updated assessment of poverty in the Philippines and outlines a framework for designing a poverty reduction strategy. It is intended to inform the Philippine Government's poverty eradication efforts, emphasizing the need for a combination of growth, equity, and institutional improvements. The report is structured into two volumes, with this volume focusing on the profile of the poor, trends in poverty, and a framework for addressing poverty.

Main Report Overview

Poverty in the Philippines

• Poverty Levels: In 1997, 25% of the population lived below the poverty line. This increased to 27.8% in 1998 due to a 2.6% decline in per capita GDP. By 1999, it had slightly decreased to 26.3%.
• Historical Trends: Poverty declined significantly from 41% in 1985, but most of the progress occurred during periods of robust economic growth.
• Sectoral Composition: Agriculture remains the most poverty-stricken sector, with over two-thirds of the poor residing in agriculture-dependent households. Poverty reduction in this sector has been slower than in industry and services.
• Self-Rated Poverty: Self-rated poverty is much higher than absolute poverty, with estimates reaching 60% in recent years. This reflects rising expectations rather than absolute deprivation.

Poverty Trends

• Growth and Poverty Reduction: Poverty decreases when the economy grows, but the pace of growth is crucial. With historical growth rates, poverty could be reduced to 14.8% by 2010, while the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) targets a faster reduction to 11.6% by 2010.
• Inequality: Inequality in the Philippines remains relatively high, with a Gini coefficient of 0.51 in the mid-1990s. It is comparable to Thailand and Malaysia, but higher than Indonesia, Korea, and China. Inequality has not shown a clear upward trend, though it is higher in urban areas than in rural ones.
• Regional Disparities: Five regions lagged in poverty reduction. These include ARMM, CARAGA, Central Mindanao, Central Luzon, and Eastern Visayas, where poverty reduction was either slow or uneven due to limited growth or increased inequality.

Framework for Attacking Poverty

The report proposes a three-pillar framework for poverty reduction: Opportunity, Security, and Empowerment.

• Opportunity: Focuses on improving access to human and physical assets and enhancing returns for the poor.
• Security: Involves protecting the poor from shocks and reducing the volatility of their income.
• Empowerment: Aims to make public institutions work for the poor.

Key Policies for Poverty Reduction

• Rice Policy: Current quantitative restrictions on rice imports lead to higher domestic prices, disadvantaging net consumers. Reducing these restrictions could improve welfare and encourage a shift from rice to more competitive products.
• Land Reform: The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) has had positive effects on productivity and income for beneficiaries. However, the program has had unintended negative effects on non-beneficiaries, particularly in terms of land access. A progressive land tax and improved land administration mechanisms are suggested.
• Regional Development: Targeted regional programs that enhance income generation, improve human capital, and infrastructure are recommended to address disparities.

Investment in People

• Education: Education is a key determinant of household welfare. While the Philippines has high enrollment rates, disparities exist between rural and urban areas, and the poor receive lower quality education. The returns to tertiary education are higher than to secondary education, but access is limited for the poor.
• Health: Health spending has become more pro-poor due to increased local investment in preventive care, but the majority of public health spending still goes to curative services. The geographic distribution of health spending is regressive, and there are concerns about the quality and reach of services due to decentralization.

Protecting the Poor

• Vulnerability: The poor are vulnerable to climate shocks, economic instability, and political unrest. These shocks affect real incomes through crop loss, reduced employment, and price increases.
• Macro-Economic Policies: Sound macroeconomic policies can reduce the impact of economic crises, though their effectiveness is limited by the nature of contagion.
• Private Transfers: Private transfers are significant, with the poorest quintile receiving nearly 60% of their pre-transfer income in transfers. These transfers are crucial for poverty reduction.
• Public Safety Nets: Public workfare programs are recommended to provide safety nets during economic downturns and natural disasters. These programs can create assets that benefit the poor and have built-in automatic stabilization features.

Conclusion

The report emphasizes the need for a multi-faceted approach to poverty reduction, combining economic growth with equity, investment in human capital, and the protection of vulnerable groups. It calls for a detailed examination of policies and programs, including legislative changes, institutional design, and financial mechanisms, to effectively combat poverty in the Philippines.