Poverty in the Philippines: Vulnerability of the Poor

Jan 25, 2012

Poverty in the Philippines: Vulnerability of the Poor

(Note: This piece is a segment from a larger article “Poverty in the Philippines: A Profile”, showcased in Focus-Philippines’ upcoming Poverty Policy Review)

Percentage of Population Vulnerable to Poverty

Poverty Status	Vulnerability Level	2000	2003	2006
Poor
	Highly Vulnerable	77.62	74.66	86.52
	Relatively Vulnerable	17.97	21.07	11.99
	Not Vulnerable	4.41	4.27	1.49
Non Poor
	Highly Vulnerable	23.62	19.68	33.15
	Relatively Vulnerable	34.04	37.21	39.29
	Not Vulnerable	42.34	43.11	27.57
Total
	Highly Vulnerable	41.76	36.21	50.70
	Relatively Vulnerable	28.64	32.36	30.31
	Not Vulnerable	29.60	31.44	18.99

Source: Trends in Household Vulnerability— Albert and Ramos (2010)

(Poor)

(Nonpoor)

Numbers of People Affected and Assisted during Disasters

	Number Affected		Number Assisted		Assistance per Affected Person		% of Income of Poor Person
	1994-1996	2004-2006	1994-1996	2004-2006	1994-1996	2004-2006	1994-1996	2004-2006
Typhoon	4,092,023	5,928,979	2,221,036	2,992,873	7	16	0.14	0.18
Flooding	829,560	1,864,245	326,826	1,039,266	6	20	0.12	0.22
Monsoon Winds/Waves	2,877	14,381	1,936	10,304	21	83	0.41	0.92
Sea Tragedy	515	906	271	411	2,083	170	39.56	1.88
Tremors/Landslides	6761	7,778	280	7,109	11	977	0.21	10.78
Volcanic Activity	35,872	15,811	28,210	15,811	117	630	2.23	6.95
Others	71,386	1,332	14,748	1,182	0	260	0.00	2.87
Total	5,038,994	7,833,432	2,593,316	4,066,955	8	19	0.15	0.21

Source: Philippines: Critical Development Constraints— ADB (2007)

Internally-Displaced Persons from the NPA and MILF conflicts

Year	Insurgent Group	Individuals Displaced
1986	NPA	52,513
1987	NPA	329,829
1988	NPA	307,412
1989	NPA	189,330
1990	NPA	219,654
1991	NPA	173,362
2000	MILF	800,000~
2001	MILF	52,000
2002	MILF	95,000
2003	MILF	438,000~

Source: Philippine Human Development Report (2005), Citizen’s Disaster Response Center, Global IDP Project

Beyond the reality of deprivation, the poor have increasingly been recognized as a segment of society that is vulnerable to debilitating shocks and processes. These processes run the gamut from political crises, crime, violence and natural disasters, but the general consequence is that the poor are more uprooted from the daily rhythms of life and livelihoods than other sectors of society. This poses serious repercussions to their means of subsistence and resource-generation.

Two of the most notable forms of vulnerability among the poor are vulnerability to the effects of armed conflicts and natural disasters, and the numbers of those displaced by these are colossal— 7.8 million for natural disasters from 2004-2006, and 2.7 million for the NPA and MILF insurgencies as of 2005.

These shocks destroy the assets and properties of the poor and nonpoor alike, but as the statistics of assistance efforts make clear, relief goods never reach most of the directly affected (compare 2.6 million versus the 5 million of 1994-1996). The value of assistance received by each person continues to prove wanting— with only an average of P19 going to each affected person in 2004-2006, many nonpoor will be made poor; many poor will be made even poorer.

For a long time, concrete means for adequately measuring the vulnerability of the poor have been lacking. More recent studies have sought to overcome these constraints, with telling results. In 2006, for example, 86.52% of the poor were found to be highly vulnerable to shocks and upheavals, whereas only 33.15% of the nonpoor were judged to be analogously so. 27.57% of the nonpoor were also identified to be not vulnerable, in contrast to a measly 1.49% of the poor.

One disquieting trend is that the size of those highly vulnerable has been increasing for both the poor and nonpoor alike. From 2000-2006, high vulnerability has risen from the poor from 77.62% to 86.52%. For the nonpoor, the figures have been more modest, but the pattern no less pronounced: 23.62% to 33.15%. Understanding the reasons for these ballooning ratings requires further study.