JEFRAN FERNANDEZ BARAQUIO
The latest Quarter 1 report from the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) pegged the Philippine GDP/GNP growth at 6.6%/6.9%, with the Net Income Factor from Abroad at 3.6%. The Service Sector is the primary driver of the growth, contributing to about 9.1%, followed by the Industry Sector at 5.3%, and the Agriculture/Fishery/Forestry Sector contributing the least at 4.2% (NEDA Report at www.neda.gov.ph).
The seemingly rosy picture of the overall Philippine economy is misleading. A closer look on the data will reveal that the growth is in sectors that are not structurally tied-up to the Philippine economy. The Agricultural Sub-Sector, which only churned out 4.1% growth for Q1, has consistently grown more slowly than the rest of the economy. It has grown slower in all, but two quarters in the past two years. (NEDA Report at www.neda.gov.ph), and this has resulted to a drag in the overall economic performance.
Statistics will show that at present, there is about 3 to 4 million jobless Filipinos, who are mostly under 35 years old, under-educated (have not finished high school), and are domiciled in the rural areas (Habito, PDI, May 2007). Statistics will likewise tell us that about one-third of the current jobs in the economy are employed by the Agriculture and Agriculture related Sectors (NSCB Report at www.nscb.gov.ph). Juxtaposing the two will tell us that the economic performance of the said sector in particular, and the total Philippine economic growth in general could have been more meaningful had it created more substantial number of jobs.
The total unemployment rate looks discouraging and is continuously high. This remains to be the biggest failure of the present administration despite of the very good numbers of the GDP/GNP. Except for the minute increase in Agriculture, the Service and Industry Sectors employment data show that the number of individuals employed has significantly declined (as of Q4 2006, NSCB Data at www.nscb.gov.ph). Recent data suggest that the Philippines has a 51% employment-to population ratio — or about only 5 out of 10 Filipinos of working age can land a job. The 6.6% / 6.9% growth is not good enough to generate enough jobs to absorb the fast growing working-age-population which is estimated to be about half million every year.
While it maybe correct to say that the Call Centers and BPOs contributed significantly in job creation, this is very unreliable since it is easily affected by swings of both internal and external economies. For instance (and with all due respect), if Indians get rid of their accents, call centers will shift immediately. Or if the Chinese get their “Ls” right instead of “R”, imagine the shift? This is what it means of the prior assertion that growth, in this case, job creation, is not structurally tied to the Philippine economy. And that there is a need to address abruptly the mismatch between opportunities of employment in this service sector, and upgrading skills and competencies of the jobless.
In addition to the unemployment crisis, the country is likewise to contend with the surging underemployment. Recent data suggest that as of April of 2007, underemployment rate stands at 18.9%, and specifically with the visible underemployed –the proportion of part time workers wanting additional working hours, has been increasing for the past years. In absolute terms, there is 6.4 million underemployed, 4.2 million of which is visible underemployed (DG Romulo Neri at www.neda.gov.ph). This phenomenon is indicative of growing poverty incidence. Underemployed are very susceptible in becoming poor due to insufficient income to pull up their family into the poverty threshold. The Regional Data on Poverty Incidence further show that indeed, regions with high underemployment rate (rather than unemployment rates) tend to have relatively higher poverty incidences (NSCB Report at www.nscb.gov.ph). It is more likely that poor families are found among the underemployed for the simple reason that they can not afford to be unemployed.
Another point worth noting, based from the Q1 NEDA GDP/GNP Report is to cross check the Industrial Origin vis-à-vis the Expenditure Shares. The latter shows who is spending (which is important) that makes the economy running. Nothing much can be said about these items as they all posted mediocre performance (some are even negative) versus last year (NEDA Report at www.neda.gov.ph). Personal Consumption which includes Household Expenditures is expected to be low. As discussed earlier, joblessness and underemployment is a problem. And even for those holding a stable job, these individuals have to contend with issues of limited and non-expanding salaries— thus less consumption that resulted to less economic activity.
Government Consumption is up by more than double versus 2006 average (NEDA Report at www.neda.gov.ph). But this can be attributed to interest payments to foreign creditors. Capital formation is low for both public and private, and these are not good signs as these have negative effects in future growth and job creation. With a close to zero growth of capital outflow, the Philippine economy will remain to be stagnant. And this will again impact negatively on the issues of unemployment and under employment (Diokno-Pascual, et.al, at www.PCIJ.org/iREPORT, 2006).
Not all have gone really bad in the Philippine economy. The strengthening of the Peso versus the Greenbucks is yielding positive results. Exports are up as always (NEDA Report at www.neda.gov.ph), but surprisingly high considering that the Peso appreciated so much for the past 12 months — thus making our products more expensive—exports should have significantly slowed down. This could only mean that the country’s exports are really good. And while it is not ultimately good nor ultimately bad, the only other positive point that’s keeping the Philippine economy afloat is the remittances of the OFWs abroad. Human resource is the country’s prime export product. And this is helping the government in preventing a “wholesale economic collapse” (Pascual-Diokno et.al at www.PCIJ.org/iREPORT,2006).
Beyond the numbers of the Q1 report, one is not required to look farther to assess the current state of Philippine economy. The delivery of social services remains to be the least priority of the current administration as evidenced by—the perennial problems of lack of classrooms, books, and teachers every opening of classes; disaster preparedness which is really a disaster; the recently concluded election marred with fraud and violence; rising costs of basic commodities; graft and corruption; growing poverty and under/unemployment; and the general sentiment of helplessness of the greater number of the Philippine population.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Habito, Cielito, No Free Lunch ”Agriculture and Job Creation” , business.inq7.net, Last Updated 20 May 2007
www.neda.gov.ph
1. DG Romulo Neri Q1 report to PGMA
2. Q1 GDP/GNP Report
www.nscb.gov.ph
3. NSCB Annual Per Capita Poverty Threshold Per Province 2006-2007
4. NSCB FAQs on the Official Poverty Statistics of the Philippines
5. NSCB First Quarter National Account Press Release
6. NSCB MDG Indicators
7. NSCB Statistics Labor and Employment April
www.PCIJ.org/iREPORT
8. Diokno-Pascual, et. al, The Economy, Walking on the Knife’s Edge,2006