poverty alleviation in the un millennium development goals (mdgs): problems and initiatives in the...
TRANSCRIPT
Poverty Alleviation in the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs): Problems
and Initiatives in the Philippines
Presented by:
OIC-Director Cleofe S. PastranaNational Economic and Development Authority
13 October 2005, Hotel Dominique, Tagaytay City
REPORT OUTLINE
I. Background on the MDGs
II. Highlights of the Second Philippines Progress Report on the MDGs
A. Poverty Situation
B. Meeting Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
C. Environmental Situation/Challenges and Priorities for Action
III. Crosscutting Challenges and Priorities for Action
A. Hindering Factors
B. Facilitating Factors
C. Parallel Initiatives
D. Implications on the Philippine Economy
In September 2000, 189 member states of the United Nations adopted the Millennium Declaration
The Millennium Declaration confirmed the commitment of member states of the United Nations to peace and security, respect for human rights, good governance and human development
The Millennium Declaration also committed the member states of the United Nations to achieve quantifiable development goals and targets (the MDGs) until 2015 (15 years) that will at least ensure that development initiatives are effectively eradicating poverty and promoting sustainable human development
Millennium Declaration
The MDGs are Owned by All MDGs are not just the national governments’ commitment to
UN or the world; most important: they are their commitments to their own people
The MDGs are our own development challenges for some decades, now gaining a new opportunity from global and national momentum of solidarity
The Goals are global in their scope, but targets and indicators can be tailor-made to shorter time scales, higher targets & local circumstances.
The MDGs are national commitments, but their achievements (or failures) are at the local level
MDGs ownership by local governments, by the business/private sector such as NGOs/Pos/civil society plays a vital role and can make a huge difference in the national and global achievements of MDGs
Baseline Current Target by Probability of(1990 or Level 2015 Attaining the
MDG year closest (2002/2004) 1/ Targetsto 1990) 2/
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Proportion of population below the
Subsistence threshold 24.3 a 13.8 d 12.15 High
Poverty threshold 45.3 a 30.4 d 22.65 High24.3a
Proportion of families below the: Subsistence threshold 20.4 a 10.4 d 10.2 High Poverty threshold 39.9 a 24.7 d 19.95 HIghProportion of households with per capita intake below 100% dietary energy requirement
69.4 b 56.9 34.7 High
MDGs: Rate of Progress
Baseline Current Target by Probability of(1990 or Level 2015 Attaining the
MDG year closest (2002/2004) 1/ Targetsto 1990) 2/
Promote gender equality and empower women
Ratio of girls to 100 boys
Elementary education 95.8 c 101.8 e 100 High Secondary education 104.5 c 115.9 e 100 High
Reduce child mortality
Under 5-mortality rate (per 1,000 children) 80 40 26.7 HighInfant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 57 29 19 High
Halt and begin to reverse the incidence of malaria & other diseases
HIV prevalence <1% <1% <1% HighMalaria morbidity rate (per 100,000 pop) 123 48 24.2 High
Ensure environmental sustainabilityProportion of families with access to safe drinking water 73.7 a 80 86.8 High
MDGs: Rate of Progress
(1990 or Level 2015 Attaining theMDG year closest (2002/2004) 1/ Targets
to 1990) 2/
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger% underweight among 0-5 yo children 34.5 27.6 17.25 MediumAchieve universal primary education
Elementary participation rate 3 85.1 a 90.05 100 MediumImprove maternal healthMaternal mortality rate 209 172 c 52.2 Medium
Increase access to RH servicesContraceptive prevalence rate 40 b 48.9 70 Medium
Achieve universal primary education
Elementary cohort survival rate 68.4 a 69.8 83.3 Low
MDGs: Rate of Progress
SDC Res. No. 1 2003 “Expanding
functions and composition of
MC-IHDC”
DILG MC 2004-152 “Guide to LGUs in the
Localization of the MDGs”
MTPDP 2004-2010 hews
closely to the MDGs
Strong commitment
of the business
sector and civil society
Investment identification per goal and target in MTPIP
2005-2010
Strong support of
donor community
for the MDGs
Legislative support of Congress
Enabling Environment for the MDGs
FIGURE 1: Poverty Incidence of Population by Region, 2003
Legend
Below national average (7.3 - 30.4)Above national average(30.5 - 54.2)
Source
NSO Family Income and Expenditures Survey 2003
ARMM 53.1
Cordillera Region 31.2
Metro Manila 7.3
Ilocos Region 30.2
Cagayan Valley 24.5
Central Luzon 17.7
CALABARZON 18.8
MIMAROPA 47.9
Bicol Region 48.4
Western Visayas 39.1
Central Visayas 28.4
Eastern Visayas 43.3
Western Mindanao 49.4
Northern Mindanao 44.3
Southern Mindanao 34.4
Central Mindanao 38.4
CARAGA 54.2
Annual Per Capita Poverty Threshold, Poverty Incidence of Families and Population by Region: 2000 and 2003
2000 Revised 2003 2000 Revised 2003 2000 Revised 2003Philippines 11, 451 12, 267 27.5 24.7 33.0 30.4NCR 15, 693 16, 796 5.7 5.0 7.6 7.3CAR 13, 066 13, 976 30.7 24.8 37.6 31.2Region I 12, 685 13, 276 29.4 24.4 35.1 30.2Region II 11, 128 11, 409 25.2 19.3 30.4 24.5Region III 13, 760 14, 342 17.3 13.7 21.4 17.7Region IV-A 13, 657 14, 616 15.2 14.9 19.1 18.8Region IV-B 11, 995 12, 406 36.3 39.7 45.2 47.9Region V 11, 372 12, 354 45.3 40.5 52.6 48.4Region VI 11, 313 12, 275 36.6 31.3 44.4 39.1Region VII 9, 656 9, 779 31.5 23.7 36.2 28.4Region VIII 9, 518 10, 802 37.5 35.5 45.1 43.3Region IX 9, 116 10, 414 38.5 44.1 44.8 49.4Region X 10, 503 11, 609 37.9 37.9 43.8 44.3Region XI 10, 264 11, 276 27.7 28.1 33.1 34.4Region XII 10, 466 11, 303 40.7 32.0 46.8 38.4Caraga 10, 896 12, 000 43.7 47.3 50.9 54.2ARMM 12, 192 12, 739 53.7 45.7 59.8 53.1
Poverty Incidenceof Population (%)Region
Annual Per Capita PovertyThreshold (in Pesos)
Poverty Incidenceof Families (%)
FIGURE 2: Subsistence Incidence of Population, by Region 2003
Legend
Below national average Above national average
Source
NSO_Family and Income Expenditure Study, 2003
ARMM 24.1
Cordillera Region 13.4
Metro Manila 0.6
Ilocos Region 11.2
Cagayan Valley 7.6
Central Luzon 4.2
CALABARZON 4.9
MIMAROPA 22.9
Bicol Region 26.6
Western Visayas 17.7
Central Visayas 14.6
Eastern Visayas 21
Western Mindanao 32.8
Northern Mindanao 25.4
Southern Mindanao 17.6
Central Mindanao 18.4
CARAGA 31
Annual Per Capita Food Threshold, Subsistence Incidence of Families and Population by Region: 2000 and 2003
2000 Revised 2003 2000 Revised 2003 2000 Revised 2003Philippines 7, 707 8, 134 12.3 10.4 15.8 13.8NCR 9, 570 9, 974 0.7 0.4 1.0 0.6CAR 8, 744 9, 117 13.7 9.8 17.9 13.4Region I 8, 552 8, 903 11.4 8.1 15.2 11.2Region II 7, 560 8, 026 9.3 5.6 11.8 7.6Region III 8, 764 9, 338 4.2 2.9 5.5 4.2Region IV-A 8, 782 9, 189 5.1 3.7 6.5 4.9Region IV-B 8, 078 8, 339 17.4 17.7 24.1 22.9Region V 8, 047 8, 372 23.3 20.3 29.3 26.6Region VI 7, 983 8, 386 17.4 12.9 23.1 17.7Region VII 6, 759 7, 016 16.9 11.2 20.7 14.6Region VIII 7, 080 7, 696 19.1 15.5 24.8 21.0Region IX 6, 574 7, 245 21.0 27.9 25.8 32.8Region X 7, 296 7, 999 19.2 19.7 23.8 25.4Region XI 7, 087 7, 751 12.8 13.5 16.7 17.6Region XII 7, 235 7, 804 17.9 14.0 22.6 18.4Caraga 7, 667 8, 353 24.4 24.5 30.7 31.0ARMM 8, 313 8, 737 23.9 18.6 28.5 24.1
RegionAnnual Per Capita Food Subsistence Incidence Subsistence Incidence
Threshold (in Pesos) of Families (%) of Population (%)
FIGURE 3: Gini Concentration Ratios, by Region 2003
Legend
Below National AverageAbove National Average
ARMM 0.3464
Cordillera Region 0.4294
Metro Manila 0.413
Ilocos Region 0.3968
Cagayan Valley 0.4411
Central Luzon 0.3486
CALABARZON 0.4058
MIMAROPA 0.4354
Bicol Region 0.4648
Western Visayas 0.4392
Central Visayas 0.4711
Eastern Visayas 0.4577
Western Mindanao 0.5197
Northern Mindanao 0.4768
Southern Mindanao 0.4583
Central Mindanao 0.4567
CARAGA 0.4294
Gini Coefficient Among Families by Region, 2000 and 2003
Region2000 2003 % Change
Philippines 0.4822 0.4660 -1.6NCR 0.4451 0.4130 -3.2CAR 0.4439 0.4294 -1.5Region I 0.4071 0.3968 -1.0Region II 0.4227 0.4411 1.8Region III 0.3591 0.3486 -1.1Region IV-A 0.4086 0.4058 -0.3Region IV-B 0.4076 0.4354 2.8Region V 0.4455 0.4648 1.9Region VI 0.4594 0.4392 -2.0Region VII 0.4691 0.4711 0.2Region VIII 0.4807 0.4577 -2.3Region IX 0.4732 0.5197 4.7Region X 0.4794 0.4768 -0.3Region XI 0.4318 0.4567 2.5Region XII 0.4631 0.4583 -0.5Caraga 0.4118 0.4294 1.8ARMM 0.3171 0.3464 2.9
GINI
Priority Policies and Programs
• Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan (KALAHI)
• Enrolment of 7 million beneficiaries under the National Health Insurance Program (NHIP)
• Wholesale portfolio of the People’s Credit and Finance Corporation (PCFC)
• Implementation of asset reform programs
• Delivery of human development services
MDGs Amount
(in US$ million)
% Share to Total MDG-
Related ODA
1 - Eradicate extreme poverty & hunger 6,259.4 77.40
2 - Achieve universal primary education 557.9 6.90
3 - Promote gender equality 3.8 0.05
4 - Reduce child mortality 139.9 1.73
5 - Improve maternal health 157.0 1.94
6 - Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria & other diseases 25.3 0.31
7 - Ensure environmental sustainability 943.31 11.67
TOTAL 8,086.6 100.00
Summary of ODA for completed & ongoing projects, by MDG category, from 2001-2005, in million US$
Source: NEDA-PMS
ODA for MDGs
INVESTMENTS SUPPORTIVE OF THE MDGs 2005-2010
MDGs COST
(in PhP Billion)
1 - Eradicate extreme poverty & hunger 1,294.22 - Achieve universal primary education 56.73 - Promote gender equality -4 - Reduce child mortality
69.95 - Improve maternal health
6 - Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria & other diseases
7 - Ensure environmental sustainability 198.88 – Global partnership for development 125.1
TOTAL 1,744.7
Source: NEDA-PIS
INTENSIFYING MULTISECTORAL PARTNERSHIP AND COLLABORATION
Government (executive, legislature, judicial)
Local Government
CSOs,Academe
Local Government
Private/Business
Donor Community
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
• Forests resources and watersheds
• Biodiversity resources
• Coastal and marine resources
• Air quality
• Water resources
• Waste and toxic chemicals
Area Proportion to Total
(Hectares) (%)
7,168,400 100
2,560,872 36
Broadleaved 2,448,864
Mixed 24,618
Coniferous 87,390
4,030,588 56
Broadleaved 3,847,284
Mixed 69,861
Coniferous 113,443
247,362 3
329,578 5Source: Forest Management Bureau (FMB)
Total Forest
Mangrove
Plantation
Forest Cover by Forest Type, 2003
Closed Forest
Open Forest
Category
Area Reforested, 1990-2003 (in hectares)Year Total
Government
Percent Non-Government
Percent
Sector
2003 15,087 13,195 87.5 1,892 12.5
2002 25,620 20,682 80.7 4,938 19.3
2001 31,440 26,524 84.4 4,916 15.6
2000 27,632 21,740 78.7 5,892 21.3
1999 42,165 31,183 74 10,982 26
1998 42,368 33,219 78.4 9,149 21.6
1997 66,236 49,301 74.4 16,935 25.6
1996 46,096 18,869 40.9 27,227 59.1
1995 65,233 21,841 33.5 43,392 66.5
1994 49,551 18,032 36.4 31,519 63.6
1993 19,211 6,347 33 12,864 67
1992 40,593 24,304 59.9 16,289 40.1
1991 93,039 73,602 79.1 19,437 20.9
1990 191,663 153,949 80.3 37,714 19.7
Annual Average
53,995
Source: DENR Annual Report
Biodiversity Resources
Philippines… one of the megadiverse countries in the
world higher regard for the endemism of local
species
but… most severely threatened of the
megadiverse countries
Coastal and Marine Resources rich sources of fish and aquatic products habitat for countless underwater wildlife natural areas for recreation/tourism Water resources• disparities in water supply coverage across regions• depletion of ground water especially in Metro
Manila and Metro Cebu• pollution of water sources
Air Quality• pollution remains a problem in Metro Manila and
major urban centers• on the level of suspended particulates (TSP), air
quality is not within standards
Waste and Toxic Chemicals• solid waste generation in Metro Manila is estimated at
5,345 tons per day• urbanization inevitably increased the use of chemicals• no integrated treatment facility for hazardous waste
Priority Policies and Programs
• Adoption of Sustainable Forest Management
• Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines and the Watersheds Code
• Various biodiversity acts
• Fisheries Code and AFMA
• Clean Air Act
Challenges and Priorities for Action
• Sustainable and more productive utilization of natural resources
• Focus and strengthen the protection of vulnerable and ecologically fragile areas
• Create healthier environment for the population• Mitigate the occurrence of natural disasters • Ensure environmental accountability for all
industries
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Government Expenditure Program by Sector FY 2000-2005
Social Services Debt Service Economic Services General Public Services Defense
CROSSCUTTING CHALLENGES AND PRIORITIES FOR ACTION
Source: DBM, Budget of Expenditure and Sources of Financing
FINANCING THE MDGs
Sector/Year 2001 2002 2003 2004
Economic Services 15,982,070 45,484,830 52,853,500 58,700,890
(15%) (32%) (33%) (34%)Social Services 28,979,110 26,352,690 34,001,700 36,135,990
(27%) (19%) (21%) (21%)General Public Services 63,375,820 69,580,140 73,954,470 78,545,740
(58%) (49%) (46%) (45%)Total Public Expenditures 108,337,000 141,417,660 160,809,670 173,382,620
FINANCING THE MDGs
Distribution of Public Expenditures by Local Government UnitsBy Sector, 2001-2004 (in thousand pesos)
Source: DBM, Budget of Expenditure and Sources of Financing
CROSSCUTTING CHALLENGES AND PRIORITIES FOR ACTION
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2001 2002 2003 2004
ODA Commitments by SectorFY 2001-2004 (US$ million)
Agriculture, agrarianreform and naturalresources
Governance andinstitutionsdevelopment
Infrastructuredevelopment
Social reform anddevelopment
Industry and services
Source: NEDA-PIS
CROSSCUTTING CHALLENGES AND PRIORITIES FOR ACTION
FINANCING THE MDGs
CROSS-CUTTING CHALLENGES AND
PRIORITIES FOR ACTION• Reduce disparities across regions
• Increase resource allocation for MDG-related programs and projects
• Enforce full/stricter implementation of laws & ensure passage of MDG-supportive bills
• Strengthen monitoring and implementation
• Scale-up campaign for localization
• Develop an advocacy plan
• Intensify multisectoral partnership & collaboration
Facilitating Factors • Strong global support for MDGs by the United
Nations, ASEAN, and other multilateral organizations;
• Expanding national support among policymakers for MDGs (e.g., creation of the House Committee on MDGs, issuance of EO on the MDGs);
• Prioritization of MDGs in resource allocation (e.g., focusing of MTPIP investments on MDGs)
• Increasing awareness and participation of private sector, LGUs in MDG-related programs
Hindering Factors
• Resource constraints (i.e., MDG financing gap of about $1.5 billion yearly);
• Lack of support by creditors for the Debt for MDG Projects/Debt for Equity in MDG Projects initiative;
• Low budgetary priority for MDGs accorded by some LGUs; and
• Lack of disaggregated data to monitor MDGs at local levels.
Parallel Initiatives
Participation in the High-Level Plenary Meeting on MDGs
Formulation of the Plan of Action for Poverty Reduction (2006-2010)Enhance the current Poverty Reduction
Strategy and Program Framework
Advocacy for the Philippine proposal on Debt for Equity in MDG Projects
Implications on the Philippine Economy
MDG attainment would require:• Enhanced revenue generation;• LGU, private sector and civil society support;• Expansion of microfinance services for the poor;• Pursuit of projects with high economic impact;• Right-sizing the bureaucracy;• Privatization; and• Tapping OFW remittances.