|
Dr. Arsenio Balisacan, director of the Southeast Asian Regional
Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (Searca) based
in UP Los Baños is this country’s expert on poverty. Poverty is
an issue that has loomed larger and larger in our national profile.
Dr. Balisacan’s interest in the issue dwells not so much on its
absolute terms as with the changes that it demonstrates over the
last 20 years.
At a recent lecture (Jaime V. Ongpin Annual
Memorial Lecture) at the Ateneo Law School in Makati, Dr. Balisacan
had a highly interested and intelligent audience in attendance
because what Dr. Balisacan says is based on empirical data that the
national government, multilateral institutions and academic groups
can learn from and react with measures to address the ingrained
problem of our recent decades.
Some facts that Dr. Balisacan brought up are
worth recording for reflection on how to address the problem. One is
that poverty in this country is very much a rural phenomenon despite
rapid urbanization that has brought its own urban poor element. The
percentage of urban poor pales before that of the rural poor. This
naturally defines the state of agriculture in this country. We have
been implementing land reform for than 20 years and it has not made
a major dent in our poverty reduction efforts in the countryside.
Aside from the layers of bureaucratic red tape and an element of
corruption, the really major obstacles are the delay in giving out
individual ownership titles to the beneficiaries, which they in turn
could use to avail themselves of credit and other means to improve
their production. Rather, the titles given out by the Department of
Agrarian Reform consist of mother titles where hundreds if not
thousands of individuals are named and for which any bank or credit
facility would flinch at undertaking them as collateral for credit.
Ownership cannot be exercised in these circumstances, which explain
the general snail-like economic progress in rural areas.
Of course, the national government has to
address not just the rural poor but also all the poor of this
country. To its credit, it has been funding anti-poverty measures
and lately, increasing them to meet the vast need of the times, a
need that is threatening to become vaster with the worldwide
economic crisis that has overtaken every nation. Dr. Balisacan had
some comments and suggestions on how to allocate the funds we are
presently using to address the poverty issue. The delivery of basic
education should be given priority and more funds. Teaching
materials, technical education and skills if situated in rural areas
will capture the poor youth and make them qualified to work and earn
enough to take themselves out of their present poverty levels.
Health services and specially family planning services should be
available in the rural areas. Investment in rural infrastructure
should be expanded. Power and roads would do much to fight poverty
issues. Dr. Balisacan applauds the new method of giving conditional
cash transfers to the poor so long as they keep their children in
school (help via food subsidy) or bring them to health clinics for
health updates (free service with medicines if necessary), which are
ways to bring education and health services to those who need it
most. Since agriculture has to be attended to in order to give
reasonable returns to those engaged in it, funding must be made
available for research and development to bring about greater
productivity and better quality. Irrigation systems for one must be
rehabilitated and expanded for they are the key to greater
productivity and more income. Better impact monitoring and
evaluation of these measures should be a priority. If data are
correct and up-to-date, po-verty alleviation measures can be
calibrated, changed, or corrected to get better results.
The panel of reactors to Dr. Balisacan’s
lecture was composed of Solita Monsod, UP Economics Department,
Alberto Lim, executive director of Makati Business Club and Tony
Lopez, publisher of Biznews and long-time business columnist (in
this paper). Ms. Monsod noted that based on figures presented by Dr.
Balisacan, poverty reduction has indeed occurred over the years,
particularly in the 90s. But lately, between 2003 and 2006, it has
reversed the trend and is climbing again despite the fact that the
conventional statistics showed a higher growth rate in this period
than in the period of the 90s. She says we ought to find out why
through better data gathering and closer study of data. Her point is
we have done it before and we should be able to continue doing it.
Alberto Lim mentioned several factors that the government has to
address for poverty reduction particularly its anemic response to
rapid population growth that has been an obstacle to a meaningful
step up in standards of living because it drags down whatever
advances are made. Tony Lopez addressed the statistical reality
issues by saying many people do not respond truthfully or at all to
surveys gathering data. The wells to do in their gated villages are
inaccessible to surveyors and many of them tend to minimize their
income levels when asked about them. Some of the lower income
population like to exaggerate their poverty when surveyed in the
hope that they will get a freebie or a subsidy. While certainly
anecdotal evidence, it should be factored in the design of surveys
or the gathering of data so as to have accuracy.
The national government would do well to listen
to Dr. Balisacan’s suggestions. We are in for harder economic
times but we can do something about their effect if we act
intelligently, competently and with integrity and vision. Land
reform has to continue and be corrected to be more efficient.
Poverty alleviation programs should be calibrated for utmost good
results. Data gathering must be enhanced by investing in better
means and equipment.
miongpin@yahoo.com
|
