Poverty and Rural Areas

I-INTRODUCTION Poverty remains the most critical social problem that needs to be addressed. Philippines' poverty line marks individuals earning less than 16,841 Peso a year. According to the data from the National Statistical Coordination Board, more than one-quarter (26. 5%) of the population falls below the poverty line in 2009. ]This figure is a much lower figure as compared to the 33. 1% in 1991. The decline has been slow and uneven, much slower than neighboring countries who experienced broadly similar numbers in the 1980s, such as People's Republic of China (PRC), Thailand, Indonesia (which poverty level lies at 8. %) or Vietnam (13. 5%). This shows that the incidence of poverty has remained significantly high as compared to other countries for almost a decade now. The unevenness of the decline has been attributed to a large range of income brackets across regions and sectors, and also unmanaged population growth. The Philippines poverty rate is roughly the same level as Haiti. The government planned to eradicate poverty as stated in the Philippines Development Plan (PDP). The PDP for the next six years are an annual economic growth of 7-8% and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).Under the MDGs, Philippines committed itself to halving extreme poverty from a 33. 1% in 1991 to 16. 6% by 2015. Understanding Philippine poverty II-CURRENT ISSUES Understanding Philippine poverty By BERNARDO VILLEGAS MANILA, Philippines – There have literally been dozens of studies on Philippine poverty over the last decade or so, by economists in Philippine universities, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and other international agencies. The latest one is entitled â€Å"Examining recent trends in poverty, inequality, and vulnerability† written by Dr.Jose Ramon Albert and Mr. Andre Philippe Ramos of the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) which has produced over the years some very useful policy-oriented studies that can guide decision making in both the government and the private sector. The conclusion of the study is not a very happy one. As based on statistics released by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) for 2000, 2003, and 2006, poverty in the Philippines is seen not to have substantially changed since the start of the millennium.Although there was a reduction of the proportion of the population who were considered poor from 33. 6 percent in 2000 to 30 percent in 2003, the poverty rate in 2006 increased to practically where it was at the beginning of the millennium at 32. 9 percent. Poverty has remained mostly unchanged and has also continued to be a predominantly rural phenomenon, with three out of every four persons found in the rural areas. The outlook looks even bleaker if the Philippine economy continues to grow at the same pace as it did in the last decade or so.It will take more than 17 years for half of the poor to exit poverty even if the per capita incomes of all persons in the country were to increase uniformly by 2 percent annually (adjusted for inflation). It will take an average time of 40 years for the poor to exit poverty if annual growth per capita is at 1 percent. It is quite evident from these projections that the Philippine economy must grow at 7 percent or more annually for the next ten or more years for there to be a significant reduction in poverty.A 7 percent growth in GDP would mean about 5 percent annual growth in per capita income since population growth is a little under 2 percent per annum. The experiences of the East Asian countries over the last twenty years (especially China) is that a growth of at least 7 percent in GDP annually for 20 years or more can make a significant dent on mass poverty. The Philippines has not attained this sustained growth of 7 percent or more over the last two decades mainly because of flawed economic policies based on import-substitution industrialization and an utter neglect of countryside a nd agricultural development.We can be optimistic that the 7 percent or more growth is attainable in the next decade or so because lessons have been learned from the past errors. Today, there is greater emphasis on export-oriented industrialization and more importantly, there is keener focus on rural and agricultural development. A greater portion of the capital budget of the Government is being spent on farm-to-market roads, irrigation systems, and post-harvest facilities. No longer is agriculture considered as the Cinderella of development. The study of Dr. Albert and Mr.Ramos also showed that in the rural areas, those at the lower and middle portions of the income distribution benefited less from growth during the period studied than those at the upper end of the distribution. They found out that while inequality went down as a whole for the country and urban areas for the period 2000 to 2006, the rural areas suffered from increased inequality largely brought about by differences in the top of the income distribution ladder. In view of these changes in income distribution, headcount poverty in the country decreased only by 0. 7 percent.Had there been no worsening of the inequality seen in the rural areas where the upper-income groups were the ones who benefited more from growth, headcount poverty would have fallen from 33. 6 percent to 22. 6 percent. The very modest gains in the fight against poverty can be attributed to improper targeting mechanisms for propoor projects and the absence of monitoring and evaluation systems for program implementation. The authors recommended that propoor public interventions that do not seem to have an impact should be reoriented, especially those with implementation and targeting issues.Policies and programs oriented toward the prevention of the transmission of poverty from one generation to the next, â€Å"especially by way of human resource investments and population management† must be essential components of any s ustainable reduction strategy of poverty and vulnerability. The authors have something positive to say about the controversial program of the present Administration of conditional cash transfers to the poorest of the poor. They opine that a conditional cash transfer program, if well executed and monitored, shows promise. Improving nonfarm income in rural areas must also be a policy thrust.My view is that these nonfarm incomes can come from tourism, transport and telecom, processed food products, housing and construction, garments and clothing accessories and other small and medium-scale enterprises that can be located in the rural areas once road and telecom networks are improved. The Philippine nautical highway is a real asset for the mobilization of non-farm rural employment. The Report concludes that sustained economic growth can dramatically reduce poverty (which would mean at least 7% annual GDP growth for the next twenty years) but this entails a serious management of resource s, â€Å"including population management. If by population management, the authors mean a drastic redistribution of the 93 million people in the Philippines away from monstrous urban areas like Metro Manila to the sparsely populated regions such as Isabela, Cagayan, Aurora, Quezon, Bicol, Leyte, Samar and numerous other rural areas, then they are right. With improved rural infrastructures such as farm-to-market roads, domestic seaports and airports, telecom facilities and educational institutions, this more efficient distribution of population will go a long way to reducing poverty in the rural areas.But if they mean reducing family sizes, the authors are contradicting themselves. They repeat over and over again that poverty is predominantly a rural phenomenon and is concentrated in the households of small farmers who are poor because they have been deprived by the State of the support infrastructures they need to earn decent incomes. They have to draw water from the rivers, plow t heir fields with the most primitive methods, bring their goods to the market using roads in the most horrible state of disrepair, etc. How can you tell these rural families to have only two children?The only resources they have precisely are their children, who many times are asked to leave school at an early age because they are needed for farm work. Until the rural infrastructures are significantly improved, these rural families would need and want to have many children. III-DEDUCTIVE REASONING REFLECTING: IF POVERTY WILL HAPPEN TO OUR FAMILY WE WILL FACE IT TOGETHER I WILL HELP MY PARENTS TO EARN MONEY SO THAT WE CAN EAT 3X A DAY . INTERPRETING: Condition  where people's basic  needs  for  food, clothing, and shelter are not being met.Poverty is generally of two  types: (1) Absolute poverty is synonymous with destitution and occurs when people cannot  obtain  adequate  resources  (measured in  terms  of  calories  or nutrition) to  support  a minimum level of physical  health. Absolute poverty  means  about the same everywhere, and can be eradicated as demonstrated by some  countries. (2) Relative poverty occurs when people do not enjoy a certain minimum level of living standards as determined by a  government  (and enjoyed by the  bulk  of the  population) that vary from country to country, sometimes within the same country.Relative poverty occurs everywhere, is said to be increasing, and may never be eradicated. APPLYING: More people need to realize that jail really is not worth the trouble, when a legal system for earning is available, as long as, one is willing to learn about it. Those who work jobs that they hate, do so, because they have no other choice or cannot see what other choices they do have. Millions of people go to work every day, angry with their boss or superior, and dread walking in the door.Their job does nothing to stimulate their learning or allow them to gain anything new. It is a damn sh ame that many jobs have become departmentalized dead-end, non-money making positions. You routinely go in and do the same thing over again, there is no growth out of your position. It is not meant to have a direct impact on profits, but does have an indirect effect on profits. The poverty problem, like I said earlier, is just a lack of knowledge. There are plenty of people who simply do not have the knowledge they need or require, to progress forward.There are some people who have addiction problems, and ended up homeless, because they were most likely not brought up properly. This is attributed to many different factors, but most of all family. EVALUATING: Rapid Population Growth Given that the population of the Philippines is increasing at a rapid rate of 2. 36% per year, it can be translated as an increase of more than 5,000 people daily in a country, which already has an increase of more than four million poor people since 1985. In 1985, the absolute number of people living in p overty was 26. 5 million.This increased to 30. 4 million in 2000 and from 2006 to 2009, increased by almost 970,000 Filipinos from 22. 2 million to 23. 1 million. As the Philippines has financially limited resources and a high poverty rate, the rapid increase in population has become a problem because there is already insufficient resources to support the population, which leaves much fewer resources to improve the economy. From 2003 to 2006, even though the Philippines experienced above-average economic growth, the poverty incidence actually increased as a result of its population growth rate.Unemployment Poverty reduction has not kept up with GDP growth rates, largely due to the high unemployment rate, high inflation rate and wide income inequality. From 2000 to 2009, the economy of Philippines grew by 3. 2% on average annually, which was on par with the economic performance of its neighbors. However, this recent growth did not translate into more jobs. Unemployment in the Philipp ines has been high in comparison to its neighbors, at around 7. 5% to 8. 0% since 2006.Sources: Philippine Development Plan: Asian Development Bank (ADB), 2010; National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) *Average for the period 2001-2010 As the world’s second largest archipelago, the Philippines have faced difficulty in job creation due to its inability to attract more foreign, direct investments. Diwa Guinigundo, whom is the Central Bank Deputy Governor, mentioned that while capital flows are turning to the emerging markets, foreign, direct investments to the Philippines remain relatively low due to the weak investment climate.The Philippines have hefty business procedures, poor tax and customs administration, weak protection against expropriation and high-energy cost. This poor investment climate has limited the Philippines ability to grow and create jobs. Therefore, the poverty rate remains constant over the years. SOLVING PROBLEM: 1. Employment generation Carefully an d extensively planned employment programs funded by the government can spur growth in jobs. Industries requiring substantial labour forces can also be given significantly larger aid from the government.Focus should be placed on developing companies that offer sustainable and long-term jobs to the community. Companies should also budget sufficiently for employee training and related community programs, so that employees and prospective employees can keep their skills relevant and up-to-date. 2. Drawing on various social institutions to fund poverty fighting programs e. g. charities, research institutions, U. N. , non-profit organizations, universities. Money funnelled from every organization available adds up to powerful sums that can produce tangible change.When organizations develop an interest, albeit vested, they tend to be more strongly motivated. Organizations that have a concrete goal to achieve with strict project plans are able to efficiently concentrate their efforts into p roducing change. For this reason charities with numerous middlemen organizations should be discouraged to ensure money reaches those in need. Importance should be given to organizations that follow the teach a man to fish ideology rather than the give the man a fish one, unless in extremely dire emergency circumstances. 3. Transparency in government spendingWhere and how a government chooses to spend taxpayers’ money and its own revenue should be visible to the media and the common man. This makes governments accountable for their actions and inaction becomes easier to pinpoint and address. It also discourages corruption in government systems. For example, transparency will be especially beneficial to civilians whose government might be allotting money to its nuclear weapons program instead of to its poverty programs. CONCLUSION The main problem in our country nowadays is poverty. Many experts made a research on how to solve it.Most in the community of the Philippines are gra ving. But sad to say that until now it is still in the stage of calamity. Poverty happens everywhere. They think citiesmay offer them a better-off living. They think they'll be much better off living in the cities than in their own villages, which only offer them natural resources. Being rich and having a great sum of money instantly are often the cause of massive exodus. What happens later is beyond their expectations; they become jobless, homeless, and the worse impact is that they are unable to return to their villages for they don't even have money to return.Most poor people who battle hunger deal with chronic undernourishment and vitamin or mineral deficiencies, which result in stunted growth, weakness and heightened susceptibility to illness. Poor children are the most prone to this and are often the victims to malnutrition, deficiencies, diseases and ultimately deaths caused by hunger. The persons who are in the position must have enough knowledge about the solutions on the p roblem. They should make a step by step process to ensure the proper on the global major problem.