Kawal:
A Review of Urban Poverty in the Philippines
Francheska B. Juanico Reed
Department of Asian Studies, Cornell University
TAG 4432: Advanced Filipino, Independent Study II
Advisor: Maria Theresa C. Savella
May 21, 2022
1
Preface
This final paper was completed as part of a Spring 2022 independent study in Advanced
Filipino at Cornell University. The purpose of the independent study was to further understand
the causes, impacts, and current state of urban poverty in the Philippines with goals of learning
the mitigatory roles of policy and design. According to 2018 data by the United Nations Human
Settlements Programme, 43% of the Philippines’ urban population lives in slums 1, which equates
to approximately 21.5 million2 Filipinos. Having lived unstably in Manila slums for six years,
and with loved ones who continue to survive its conditions, the crisis of urban poverty hits home.
As poverty continues, it is increasingly crucial for all to become aware of their responsibilities in
joining efforts towards poverty alleviation. Special thanks to advisor Maria Theresa Savella, or
Tita Thess, for her phenomenal guidance throughout this project.
Introduction
Kawal, in Filipino, means soldier, follower, or chess piece. Like soldiers or pawns, the
urban poor are at the forefront of battles against present issues. They are the first to be affected
before, and sometimes for the benefit of, other parts of the country. Although the urban poor
have developed an extraordinary sense of resilience from these inequities, little has been done to
improve their lives over the past 70 years. This paper will investigate the historical,
socioeconomic and political-legal context surrounding urban poverty in order to analyze existing
solutions and make recommendations towards poverty reduction in the Philippines.
Defining & Measuring Poverty
Poverty can be defined and measured in multiple ways. According to the
Merriam-Webster dictionary, poverty means “scarcity; the state of one who lacks a usual or
1
2
United Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2018.
United Nations World Urbanization Prospects, 2022.
2
socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions; debility due to malnutrition; or
lack of fertility.”3 In 1995, the United Nations held the World Summit on Social Development
where leaders from 186 countries4 agreed to define various types of poverty: human poverty,
income poverty, absolute poverty, and relative poverty. Per their definitions, “human poverty is
the lack of essential human capabilities, notably literacy and nutrition; absolute poverty, often
used interchangeably with extreme poverty, is the degree of poverty below which the minimal
requirements for survival are not being met.”5 Absolute or extreme poverty is the most relevant
term for the poor conditions of the Philippines as well as chronic poverty, which refers to the
persistence of poverty over a prolonged period of time. Another increasingly popular term
relevant to conditions of the urban poor in the Philippines is environmental poverty. One
definition of environmental poverty is “the lack of a healthy environment needed for society's
survival and development as a direct result of human-induced environmental degradation.”6
Income is the basis commonly used to measure poverty, especially as reflected in data
from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), but it is important to acknowledge other factors
of poverty excluded in this method, such as literacy, nutrition, access to basic services, among
other conditions. For instance, contrary to PSA data suggesting an income-based poverty rate of
16.7% in 2020, 48% of all households self-identified as poor according to Social Weather
Stations.7 These significant disparities between government-based data and self-reported data, as
well as between and within regions, merit more nuanced, disaggregated studies of poverty.8
3
Merriam-Webster, n.d.
United Nations, n.d.
5
Asian Development Bank, 2004.
6
Liu, 2012.
7
Abao & Cornelio, 2021, 8.
8
Asian Development Bank, 2004, 12.
4
3
Historical Context
Spanish Colonialism
Because Philippine history, economy, politics and society heavily interconnect, history is
crucial to understanding the full picture of poverty. In the 1500s, Spain weaponized the church as
a political structure that integrated existing native barangay hierarchies to establish an
oligarchical system and a Spanish Filipino upper class known as the principalia.9 The most
significant enduring change during Spanish colonialism was the privatization of communal land
and individual elite ownership by principalia; here begins the issue of institutionalized land
inequality, the historical root of poverty in the Philippines.
Jose Basco y Vargas became governor in 1778 and implemented a series of reforms that
skyrocketed economic growth. In 1782, the success of the government tobacco monopoly caused
the country to lead in world tobacco production, marking the country’s first glimpse of economic
prosperity.10 International trade grew the national economy throughout the 1800s with tobacco,
abaca and sugar becoming the main exports. By the 1850s, Chinese mestizos invested in land,
became landlords and formed the majority of the Filipino elite now known as the ilustrados.11
American Imperialism
Although advocacy and collective Filipino power were first realized during the Spanish
colonial period, the roots of Philippine politics and law today were formally established by the
United States Taft Commission in 1900.12 In the first two years of the commission alone, the
following were established: 499 laws, a judicial system, legal code, civil service, municipal
boards, provincial governors, and an archipelago-wide police force among many others, but most
9
Dolan, 1993, 6.
Ibid, 9.
11
Ibid, 12.
12
Ibid, 28.
10
4
importantly, the integration of elite ilustrados in the new joint US-Philippine government.13 In
1904, the US bought the friars’ 410,000 acres of estates for $7.2 million and resold them to
ilustrados, significantly widening pre-existing disparities in land ownership. By 1907, the United
States established a bicameral legislature, extended the Bill of Rights to Filipinos, created
positions for two ilustrado representatives to serve in the US Congress, and held the first
Philippine elections.14 The Nacionalista Party was established in 1907 and led by conservatives
Manuel Quezon and Sergio Osmeña, who guarded elite interests until after World War II 15 when
competition arose from the opposition, the Liberal Party.16
In 1916, the Jones Act renamed the houses of the Philippine legislature to the Senate and
the House of Representatives. Quezon was elected senate president, and Osmeña house speaker.
Voting rights were extended to all literate men in 1916, literacy rates grew, and the granting of
women’s rights to vote in 1936 substantially increased the electorate.17 Quezon and Osmeña
largely dismissed serious social issues involving land ownership, tenancy, and high wealth
inequality, as nearly full control of the legislature by the Nacionalista party barred the political
inclusion of non-elite interests.18
The Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 revised the Jones Act to establish a ten-year
transition period from commonwealth to full independence.19 “The commonwealth would be
self-governing with its own constitution although foreign policy, immigration and currency
would involve the United States.”20 However, the illusion of a semi-independent nation and an
equal partnership proved false in the fine print. While only 50 Filipino immigrants were allowed
13
Ibid, 29.
Ibid.
15
Ibid, 30.
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid, 31-32.
18
Ibid, 32.
19
Ibid, 39.
20
Ibid.
14
5
into the US annually, American immigration to the Philippines was unrestricted. 21 Philippine
goods were only tariff-free for the first 5 years of the Commonwealth, while American goods
remained free of tariffs entirely.22 Over time, the country and its economy have depended and
continue to depend heavily on US markets and aid. The Philippine legislature gained complete
ilustrado control once the country was established as a Commonwealth in 1935.
Urbanization & Neocolonialism
Since the early twentieth century, urbanization has controlled socioeconomic and political
landscapes across the world. In the Philippines, current ubiquities of urban growth have failed to
translate into effective social and urban policy.23 For instance, as early as 1930 during American
rule, the ilustrado government’s interventions solely focused on the ‘resettlement’ of the urban
poor, a vast majority of whom dwelled within informal settlements.24 Although the earliest
known resettlement in the Philippines occurred in the sixteenth century during Spanish
colonialism to consolidate subjugation of Filipinos, it differs from contemporary understandings
of relocation as a means of decongesting dense cities.25 During the Great Depression, agrarian
unrest over issues of land tenure and sharecropping festered, leading to a rise in communist
groups.26 Meanwhile, one-fourth of the national budget devoted to defense27 at the onset of World
War II turned useless when Japan attacked in 1941 and US-Philippine forces surrendered.
Communist guerrilla forces who advocated for agrarian reform played an unexpectedly
significant role in freeing the country from Japanese occupation in 1945.28
21
Ibid.
Ibid.
23
Walnycki, 2014.
24
Constantino-David & Regala-Angangco, 1975, 17.
25
Ibid.
26
Dolan, 1993, 38-39.
27
Borlaza et al., 2022.
28
Dolan, 1993, 38-41.
22
6
Nonetheless, this intense fighting towards the end of World War II left the entire country
gaining full independence while extremely damaged, the capital nearly destroyed, and with the
economy in disarray.29 As if matters could not have possibly worsened, both the US and
Philippine Congress passed the Bell Trade Act in 1946, which provided $620 million in US aid
for post-war reconstruction in exchange for American economic advantages related to currency,
tariffs, imports, and most controversially: equal economic rights to exploit natural resources.
Known as the parity clause, this required an amendment to the 1935 Philippine Constitution’s
thirteenth article which restricted exploitation of natural resources solely to Filipinos.30
It was during this period of reconstruction that urbanization began given “the effects of
World War II, the exodus of rural migrants to big cities,” and ongoing communist agrarian unrest
in the countryside.31 The first documentations of a Manila slum and its urban dwellers were
published in 1951, with a survey of five government resettlement and housing projects published
in 1955.32 Urban poverty did not occur in isolation; until today, the reality of Philippine cities
consists of “pockets of urban affluence surrounded by a mass of urban poor.”33 Urbanization
further accelerated in the 1970s34 with migration predominantly trending towards Metropolitan
Manila.35 According to 1983 data from the National Housing Authority Survey, other areas with
large urban poor and informal settler populations included Cebu, Bacolod, Iloilo City, Jolo, and
Davao City.36
29
Borlaza et al., 2022.
Dolan, 1993, 43.
31
Constantino-David & Regala-Angangco, 1975, 17.
32
Ibid, 17-18.
33
Ibid, 18.
34
Ramos-Jimenez et al., 1988, 79.
35
Ibid, 80.
36
Ibid, 81-82.
30
7
Socioeconomic Context
The Urban Poor
Downturns in urbanization emerged with the “proliferation of informal settlements, rising
rates of unemployment and underemployment, and the growing shortage in provision of basic
urban services.”37 The rise of urban poverty is ascribed to the inundation of rural migrants from
disadvantaged areas with minimal skills, assets, and employment odds.38 Service sectors are
oftentimes the only employment option for the urban poor. Other common characteristics include
nuclear families of six or more, below-poverty-line family income that worsens over time, and
children working for additional income. Expenses are primarily allocated towards food and
shelter, with lower-priority expenses being education, medical care, and clothing.39 Communities
of the urban poor are unsanitary informal settlements distinguished by dilapidated housing,
overcrowding, and an absence of basic amenities. In addition to the severe economic decline of
the 1980s, these conditions have resulted in high mortality rates, morbidity and malnutrition.
Despite this, many of the urban poor continue to prefer it over their rural past.40
Community Organizing
In many communities of the urban poor, leaders are known as barangay captains. With
jurisdiction limited to the specific community, neighborhood, or barangay, their powers are
temporary and hold minimal impact.41 Multiple factors affect abilities to participate in
community organizing, such as duration of residence, work flexibility, educational attainment,
and child care. Historically, organizing occurred informally during community events like fiestas
but the rise of slum clearances and relocation pushed residents to successfully form organizations
37
Ibid, 80-81.
Ibid, 82.
39
Ibid.
40
Ibid.
41
Ibid, 83.
38
8
against eviction threats and negotiate with authorities. These groups included Kongreso ng
Pagkakaisa ng Maralitang Lunsod (KPML), Samahang Maralita para sa Makatao at
Makatarungang Paninirahan (SAMA-SAMA)42, and National Congress of Urban Poor
Organizations (NACUPO) to name a few.43 Of the many urban poor coalitions assembling in
cities across the country, several progressed in development through lobbying, more formal
negotiations, and partnerships with governments and NGOs to provide internal social support
like skills training and employment assistance.44
Poverty & Economy
According to the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), the rapid
growth of the urban population is “one of the most important factors affecting economic
development, employment creation, and the provision and quality of social services.” Although
rapid population growth presents a large consumer market for investors, persisting environmental
and social conditions are a disincentive if unresolved.45
Ongoing chronic poverty in the Philippines, albeit in extremely slow decline, is a key
factor affecting the country’s level of economic expansion; this phenomenon is known as a
poverty trap.46 According to the Asian Development Bank, evidence suggests that reducing
poverty can increase economic growth. Pro-poor social and urban policies enhance economic
productivity which in turn increase all incomes. However, a significant portion of Filipinos have
minimally contributed to the economy due to lack of skills, massive overseas migration, and
radical insurgencies in particular regions. Moreover, economic growth has been limited by the
“sustained decline in domestic investments, weaknesses in institutions and social infrastructure,
42
Ibid.
Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor, n.d.
44
Ramos-Jimenez et al., 1988, 83.
45
Asian Development Bank, 2004, 12.
46
Asian Development Bank, 2009, 53.
43
9
institutional uncertainty, and a history and culture that has negatively affected economic
activities.”47 Sociopolitical poverty traps also include chronic corruption, kin systems, other
cultural influences, and rural inequality historically rooted in land ownership. Large families, low
educational attainment, employment insecurity, rising costs without corresponding wage
increases, and land or housing insecurity are among other factors preventing an escape from the
trap.48
Typical models for sustained economic growth require physical capital such as
investments, labor and human capital, and technology. On the other hand, chronic poverty has
persisted due to constraints in: investment, such as credit and microfinance services;
connectivity, such as roads, electricity, internet, and irrigation; and human capital, such as
intergenerational cycles of poverty preventing access to education. Economic crises, natural
disasters, and inequality in asset distribution all lead to sociopolitical instability and decreased
investment.49 In terms of policy, economic growth was slowed by “policies that favored capital
over labor and import-substituting industries over agriculture, and that led to underinvestment in
the human capital of the poor.”50 The significant role of elites in these decisions caused
devastatingly low agricultural productivity.51
In short, chronic poverty in the Philippines can be attributed to the following: low
economic growth over the past 50 years, low rates of poverty reduction, weakness in
employment generation and quality, episodes of food inflation, failure to manage population
growth, high and persistent levels of inequality such as income inequality, inequitable land
47
Ibid, 53-54.
Ibid, 54.
49
Ibid, 54-59.
50
Gerson, 1998, 46-49.
51
Ibid.
48
10
distribution, and inter- and intra-regional labor market inequality, regular shocks and exposures
to conflicts, natural disasters and environmental poverty, and economic crises.52
Political-Legal Context
Anti-Poverty Programs
Since the post-war period concentrated on economic reconstruction, government
strategies towards poverty reduction did not develop until the 1970s.53 Beginning in the 1970s,
national anti-poverty programs included a fundamental series of actions on “agricultural and
fisheries development; food subsidies and nutrition programs; livelihood and employment
assistance; community water and sanitation; education and health services; and social housing.”54
The 1980s brought the addition of workers protection; institution-building and civic
participation; and recognition of ancestral domains. Since the 2000s, significant milestones
included a “more comprehensive disaster response, conditional cash transfers (CCTs), and a
framework of social protection.”55
Subsequent administrations in the 1970s introduced flagship anti-poverty programs that
combined these measures in different ways.56 Launched in 1965-1986 by the Marcos
administration were Presidential Decree (PD) 27, Samahang Nayon, Masagana 99, feeding
programs, and BLISS mass housing; in 1986-1992 by Aquino were the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program, community-based resource management, the National Livelihood Program,
and Tulong sa Tao program; in 1992-1998 by Ramos were the National Anti-Poverty
Commission (NAPC), expansive Social Reform Agenda with the minimum basic needs
approach, prioritizing beneficiaries of the country’s 20 poorest provinces, and the aggressive
52
Ibid, 39-52.
Asian Development Bank, 2009, 61.
54
Africa, 2017, 52.
55
Ibid.
56
Asian Development Bank, 2009, 61.
53
11
inclusion of civil society as stakeholders; in 1998-2001 by Estrada was the short-lived Lingap
Para sa Mahirap program, which aimed to provide a broad package of interventions to the 100
poorest families in every city and province; in 2001-2010 by Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) was the
Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan - Comprehensive Integrated Delivery of Social Services
(KALAHI-CIDSS) program which delivered basic services and inclusive community-driven
planning, budgeting, and Self-Employment Assistance - Kabuhayan (SEA-K), the expansion of
PhilHealth to cover the 4.8 million poorest families, and the 4Ps CCT program; and in
2010-2016 by Aquino III were the expansion of the 4Ps, SEA-K, and the Payapa at Masaganang
Pamayanan program (PAMANA) which focused on 218 largely armed conflict-affected
municipalities in 43 provinces.57
Policy Analysis
According to Social Weather Stations, self-rated poverty decreased by a whopping 20%
throughout Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s term, thus revealing her anti-poverty programs as the
most effective in reducing poverty out of all administrations since 1986.58 The only two
administrations in which self-rated poverty trended upwards since 1986 were that of Cory
Aquino, which was likely due to post-Marcos instability, and Rodrigo Duterte, likely due to the
War on Drugs and COVID-19 pandemic.59 Perhaps the most significant reason why
Macapagal-Arroyo’s programs were the most effective is because she integrated macroeconomic
and anti-poverty policy contrary to every other administrative approach that dichotomized the
two and downplayed the latter.60 (This comes at no surprise especially when taking into account
the fact that she is the only president in Philippine history with a doctorate degree in economics.)
57
Africa, 2017, 52.
Abao & Cornelio, 2021, 8.
59
Ibid.
60
Africa, 2017, 52.
58
12
In addition to the government’s ineffective pattern of separating economic and anti-poverty
policy, economic policies were at a micro scale and dominated by private market-driven
interests, thus widening the divorce and luring investments away from public, anti-poverty
programs.61 Historical changes in development policy are referred to as “neoliberal free market
policies of globalization” and include the increasing privatization of public assets like hospitals
over time.62 On the other hand, the Philippines’ ‘socially liberal yet fiscally conservative’
approach of economic liberalization contrasts starkly with its less market-driven neighboring
countries in the region who maintain lower poverty rates and richer socioeconomic performance
altogether.63 Development data from the United Nations over 70 years suggests that the country’s
current strategies of profit-seeking within public and social services are constraining economic
growth by sustaining poverty and wasting capital, thus requiring a major shift towards social
development to revive the economy.64 Long-held neoliberal beliefs that sustained economic
growth will reduce poverty have not proved true for the country since independence; in fact, it is
already well-proven that poverty reduction does not result from “targeted anti-poverty policies
per se, but rather from an overall strategy with wider social, economic, and political
objectives.”65
Housing Rights & Related Laws
Informal housing was recognized as a legal issue by urban governments beginning in the
1950s, which led to eviction efforts and unsuccessful relocation.66 Resettlement areas were often
too far from urban centers and offered little amenities or employment, thus resulting in the
recurring return of the urban poor to squatter settlements. Because of this, the government now
61
Ibid, 53.
Ibid, 54.
63
Ibid, 54-55.
64
Ibid, 55.
65
Ibid, 56.
66
Ramos-Jimenez et al., 1988, 83.
62
13
shifts focus primarily towards the upgrading of informal housing and providing social assistance,
albeit urban poverty remains an ongoing concern.67
Several legal precedents laid the foundation for housing rights and other issues of the
urban poor, such as Presidential Decree (PD) 772, PD 1517, the 1987 Constitution, the Urban
Development and Housing Act of 1992 (UDHA), the Comprehensive and Integrated Shelter and
Finance Act of 1994 (CISFA), and landmark Supreme Court cases such as Sumulong v. Gerrero
and City of Makati v. Tensuan.68 Acknowledging national growth of the urban poor, the 1987
Constitution proclaimed housing rights amongst other issues of social justice and human rights in
Sections 9-10. Section 9 required public programs in urban land reform and housing as well as
decent affordable housing with basic services and access to employment. On the other hand,
Section 10 required that the government “consult adequately with informal settlers prior to
determining a ‘just and humane’ eviction and demolition.” 69
Existing Solutions
Urban Design & Development
As we have learned throughout this project, community involvement and governance are
key factors to consider for poverty reduction. More specifically, one leading development
program that examines the larger picture of civic participation and governance in urban poverty
reduction is Macapagal-Arroyo’s KALAHI-CIDSS National Community-Driven Development
Program (KC-NDDP). Firstly, one must distinguish between the experiences of poverty in urban
and rural communities. Two characteristics that particularly confront urban poor communities are
the informal cash-based economy and the environmental risks to their deteriorating physical
living conditions. Despite this, however, the urban poor maintain strong social ties and active
67
Ibid, 84.
Leckie, 2003, 65-85.
69
Ibid, 65-66.
68
14
community organizations. This is a key point of interest for the 2017 Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD) report on urban community-driven development as it
examines eight case studies of successful community organizations across the Philippines,
including the areas of Metro Manila, Rizal, Kabankalan City, and Butuan City.70 Each location
has different characteristics, concerns and reasons for organizing-- some areas demonstrate the
prominence of women's leadership, while Metro Manila struggles with overlapping jurisdictions
between local and national management. Other areas have strong community organizations that
have developed the ability to actively lobby at the policy level.
Some of the important findings from this report include the importance of
integrating community participation at all levels of government, the success of collaboration
between community groups and NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) in developing urban
housing solutions, and the urgent need to primarily address land, housing and disaster
management issues for all development projects. After reviewing this report, questions still arise
regarding the selection of case studies. How are studies determined to be successful? Why
weren't other cities selected? Answering these questions is important to evaluate the scalability
of the program, and how to build successful community-driven development across the country,
not just in selected areas.
Recommendations
Based on all reviewed literature and research, the government is considered the agent of
poverty most in need of reform. Aspects needing reform include its leadership, funding,
unresolved national employment and immigration issues, and infrastructure for local organizing
especially in favor of women's leadership. Additional key issues pointed out by the literature are
70
Racelis et al., 2016, ii.
15
concerns about urban planning and health programs while advocating for reforms such as
decentralized development, land use/agrarian reform, and population control.
Although the three issues of government, urban planning and health programs mainly
have a great need to be addressed, the important role played by the climate crisis and education
in the implementation strategies and results of the forthcoming reforms cannot be ignored. With
the current state of the planet regarding climate change, it is important now more than ever that
our country prioritizes sustainable action to make way for other anticipated reforms. Besides the
climate crisis, another significant factor that affects the country's outcomes is the education of
the people, which directly affects their electoral behavior, as well as their ability to critically
evaluate the complexities of each administration.
My second personal recommendation, which goes hand in hand with the aforementioned
government reforms, is to reform education to increase public access to critical thinking and
informed decision making. A relevant example that shows the importance of education is the
recent victory in the 2022 presidential elections by Ferdinand Marcos Jr. despite the platform of
candidate Leody de Guzman aligning closest to most if not all of the policy recommendations
championed by global experts over the past 50 years. There is no doubt that rampant social
media use has also affected Philippine politics, and on a larger scale, our culture. Therefore, the
regulation of technology and the encouragement of free, non-monopolized media will greatly
affect future public decision-making. Finally, my third personal recommendation echoes the
proposals in each piece of writing throughout my research, which mainly propose reforms in
government, urban planning, and health programs.
16
Conclusion
Clearly, various factors influence the state of urban poverty in the Philippines today,
including its history, society, culture, politics, economy, and law. Poverty is historically rooted in
class and land inequities established by Spain and magnified by the United States, resulting in
the endless hegemony of elite groups over farmers, the urban poor, and the rest of the lower
class. In the spirit of an integrated anti-poverty approach, concurrent goals for urban poverty
reduction must entail more robust political and economic reforms, as well as reforms in urban
planning, agriculture, and education. Above all, however, the climate crisis is the most globally
life-threatening present issue that must stand at the forefront of any change.
As architects, our discipline is historically rooted in the importance of shelter and how
space incubates experiences. With this in mind, urban poverty is an inherently architectural issue
whose endless symptoms stem from inadequate, violent spaces worsened by institutional
restraints. In the face of moral complicity, it is therefore obligatory that we answer global calls to
action by lending expertise in climate-resilient urban development and the design of a systemic
framework centered around housing to improve socioeconomic and political welfare.
17
Bibliography
Abao, C. V., & Cornelio, J. S. (2021, July). Social Development Reform in the Duterte
Administration. SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3878607
Africa, J. E. A. (2017). Reforming Philippine Anti-Poverty Policy. National Anti-Poverty
Commission.
https://napc.gov.ph/sites/default/files/documents/articles/Reforming%20Philippine%20A
nti-Poverty%20Policy.pdf
Asian Development Bank. (2004). City Development Strategies to Reduce Poverty. Asian
Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/27946/content.pdf
Asian Development Bank. (2009). Poverty in the Philippines: Causes, Constraints, and
Opportunities. Asian Development Bank.
https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/27529/poverty-philippines-causes-con
straints-opportunities.pdf
Borlaza, G. C., Cullinane, M., & Hernandez, C. G. (2022). Philippines - The period of U.S.
influence | Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Philippines/The-period-of-U-S-influence
Constantino-David, K., & Regala-Angangco, O. (1975). Studies of Urban Poverty in the
Philippines. Asian Studies: Journal of Critical Perspectives on Asia, XIII(1), 17–36.
https://www.asj.upd.edu.ph/mediabox/archive/ASJ-13-01-1975/constantino-david%20an
d%20regala-angangcostudies%20urban%20poverty%20philippines.pdf.
Diwakar, V. (2018, August). SUSTAINING POVERTY ESCAPES IN THE PHILIPPINES: Policy
Implications Brief. Agrilinks.
18
https://www.agrilinks.org/sites/default/files/usaid-poverty-escapes-philippines-policybrief
-august2018-508.pdf
Dolan, R. E. (1993). Philippines: a country study. Library of Congress Federal Research
Division. https://archive.org/details/philippinescount00dola_0/page/38/mode/2up
Gerson, P. (1998, September). Poverty and Economic Policy in the Philippines. Finance &
Development, 35(3), 46-49.
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/1998/09/gerson.htm
Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board. (2017). National Urban Development and Housing
Framework 2017-2022, Abridged Version. Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board.
https://hlurb.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/services/lgu/clup-guidebook/NUDHF_2017_202
2%20_Abridged_Version.pdf
Jha, A., & Kryspin-Watson, J. (2014, August). Safe and Resilient Infrastructure in the
Philippines: Applications of International Experience. World Bank Group Open
Knowledge Repository.
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/21732/ACS121820WP0B
o0B00P13104100PUBLIC00.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Leckie, S. (Ed.). (2003). National Perspectives on Housing Rights. Springer Netherlands.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/National_Perspectives_on_Housing_Rights/CD8
mb54zmdUC?hl=en&gbpv=0
Liu, L. (2012, January). Environmental poverty, a decomposed environmental Kuznets curve,
and alternatives: Sustainability lessons from China. Ecological Economics, 73, 86-92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.10.025
19
Manasan, R. G., Adaro, C. E., & Tolin, L. A. C. (2017). Assessment of the BUB program:
Improving access of local communities to basic services and strengthening social capital.
Econstor. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/211013
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Poverty Definition & Meaning. Merriam-Webster.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poverty
National Disaster Risk, Reduction & Management Council. (2011). 2011-2028 National Disaster
Risk, Reduction & Management Plan. National Disaster Risk, Reduction & Management
Council. https://ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/41/NDRRM_Plan_2011-2028.pdf
Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor. (n.d.). Background (History). Presidential
Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP).
https://pcup.gov.ph/index.php/about-pcup/background-history
Racelis, M., Karaos, A. M., & Labastilla, S. (2016, December). Identifying Options for an Urban
Community-Driven Development Program in the Philippines. Department of Social
Welfare and Development.
https://kalahi.dswd.gov.ph/press/downloads/category/68-2016?download=362:2016-racel
is-et-al-identifying-options-for-urban-cdd
Ramos-Jimenez, P., Chiong-Javier, Ma. E., & Sevilla, J. C. C. (1988). The Poor in Philippine
Cities: A Situation Analysis. Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, 3(1),
79–89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41056740
United Nations Human Settlements Programme. (2018). Population living in slums (% of urban
population) - Philippines | Data. World Bank Data.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.SLUM.UR.ZS?locations=PH
20
United Nations World Urbanization Prospects. (2022). Philippines Urban Population 1960-2022
| MacroTrends. Macrotrends.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/PHL/philippines/urban-population
United Nations. (n.d.). World Summit for Social Development 1995 | United Nations. The United
Nations. https://www.un.org/en/conferences/social-development/copenhagen1995
Valdez, A. G. L. (2017). Lupa, Kabuhayan at Komunidad: ang kritikal na pagsusuri ng zero
squatter program sa Samahang Binhi Homeowners Association Inc. University of the
Philippines Manila. http://dspace.cas.upm.edu.ph:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/1065
Walnycki, A. (2014). Introduction to urban poverty. International Institute for Environment and
Development. https://www.iied.org/introduction-urban-poverty