2009 Official Poverty Statistics
Towards Better Targeted
and Focused Poverty Reduction Programs
Presented by
Ms. Jessamyn O. Encarnacion
Director, Social Statistics Office
National Statistical Coordination Board
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
9:00 AM, 26 July 2012
Hyatt Hotel, Manila
1
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
Outline of Presentation
I.
Introduction
II. Official Poverty Estimation Methodology
III. 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. National
B. Regional/Provincial
C. Basic Sectors
D. Employed and Unemployed Population
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
2
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
SOURCE OF OFFICIAL POVERTY STATISTICS IN THE PHILIPPINES
Executive Order 352
Designation of Statistical Activities that will Generate Critical
Data for Decision-making of the Government and the Private
Sector
• Issued on July 1, 1996
• The Technical Committee on Poverty Statistics (TC PovStat)
created by the NSCB is in charge of the
formulation/development of the official poverty estimation
methodology.
• The NSCB generates and releases the official poverty
statistics in the Philippines.
3
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
SOME DEFINITIONS
What is the Food Threshold?
•Refers to the minimum income/expenditure required for a
family/individual to meet the basic food needs, which satisfies the
nutritional requirements for economically necessary and socially
desirable physical activities
•Also referred to as the subsistence threshold or the food poverty line
4
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
SOME DEFINITIONS
What is the Poverty Threshold?
• Refers to the minimum income/expenditure required for a
family/individual to meet the basic food and non-food requirements
Basic Non-Food Requirement includes: 1) clothing and footwear; 2) fuel, light and
water; 3) housing maintenance and other minor repairs; 4) rental of occupied
dwelling units; 5) medical care; 6) education; 7) transportation & communication; 8)
non-durable furnishing; 9) household operations and 10) personal care and effects
Basic Non-Food Requirement excludes: 1) recreation; 2) tobacco; 3) alcoholic
beverages; 4) durable furnishings; 5) taxes; 6) special family occasion expenditure;
7) total gifts and contributions; 8) total other disbursements (e.g., major repair of
house, loans granted to person outside family; amortization of real property).
• Is equal to the cost of minimum basic needs:
food + non-food
5
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
SOME DEFINITIONS
Who are the Food Poor/Core Poor?
• Refers to families/individuals with per capita income/expenditure
less than the per capita food threshold
Who are the Poor?
• Refers to families/individuals with per capita income/expenditure
less than the per capita poverty threshold
If a family is poor, all the members of the family are considered
poor
6
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
SOME DEFINITIONS
What is the Magnitude of the Food Poor/Core Poor?
• Refers to the number of families/individuals who are food poor/core
poor
What is the Magnitude of the Poor?
• Refers to the number of families/individuals who are poor
7
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
SOME DEFINITIONS
What is subsistence incidence?
• Refers to the proportion of families/individuals with per capita
income/expenditure less than the per capita food threshold to the
total number of families/ individuals
• Is Equal to the proportion of the food poor
What is poverty incidence?
• Refers to the proportion of families/individuals with per capita
income/expenditure less than the per capita poverty threshold to
the total number of families/individuals
• Is Equal to the proportion of the poor
Both subsistence incidence and poverty incidence can be
expressed as proportion of families or proportion of individuals
8
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
The 1st official poverty estimation methodology was adopted in
1987.
Between 1987-2011 (24 years), there were three refinements on
the methodology since its adoption.
History of the official poverty estimation methodology
Year
Refinements
Considerations
1987
9
1992
1st
Refinements were made so as not to
overestimate poverty
2003
2nd
Refinements were made to generate
provincial poverty statistics by using
regional menus priced using
provincial prices.
2010/2011
3rd
Refinements were undertaken to
enhance comparability of estimates
across space and over time.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
II. Official Poverty Estimation Methodology
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
10 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
DATA
SOURCES
II. Official Poverty Estimation Methodology
National food bundle
PROVINCIAL food bundle
FNRI
“Visualizable”
LEAST cost
100% RENI for energy
100% RENI for protein
80% RENI for vitamins
and minerals
Food eaten
in the area
Actual Prices
NSO
and
BAS
Farmgate Price
Retail Price
FOOD THRESHOLD
NSCB
If income/expenditure of family/individual
is less than food threshold
Provincial SUBSISTENCE INCIDENCE
and MAGNITUDE OF SUBSISTENCE POOR
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
11 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
National reference food bundle from
the Test of Revealed Preference
Meal Time
Breakfast
Viands
Scrambled egg
Coffee with milk
Lunch
Sample translation: NCR
Meal Time
Breakfast
Boiled rice
Boiled/ginataang monggo with
malunggay and dried dilis
Coffee with milk
Lunch
Boiled monggo with
malunggay and dried dilis
Boiled rice/corn mix
Banana, latundan
Fried fish/boiled pork
Vegetable dish
Boiled rice
Dinner
Boiled rice/rice-corn mix
Snacks
Scrambled egg
Boiled rice/rice-corn mix
Banana
Dinner
Viands
Boiled kangkong
Bread or boiled rootcrop
Boiled rice
Snacks
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
12 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
Fried tulingan
Pandesal
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
II. Official Poverty Estimation Methodology
Food threshold
Non-food threshold
Constant FE/TBE ratio
POVERTY THRESHOLD
If income/expenditure of family/individual
is less than poverty threshold
ACTUAL Non-Food Basic Needs
• Education
• Clothing & footwear
• Medical care
• Transportation &
communication
• Fuel, light & water
• Housing
• Housing maintenance &
other minor repairs
• Non-durable furnishings
• Household operations
• Personal care & effects
• Rental of occupied dwelling
unit
Provincial POVERTY INCIDENCE
and MAGNITUDE OF POOR
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
13 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
14 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Daily Threshold (family of five)
In 2009, family of five* needed PhP 160 daily income to meet food needs
and PhP 231 to stay out of poverty!
Daily Food Threshold for a
Family of Five (in PhP)
Daily Poverty Threshold for a
Family of Five (in PhP)
300
250
231
250
200
200
160
150
150
183
150
104
100
100
127
55
Inflation for food:
50
50
2006-2009:24.3%
0
0
1991
15
79
2003
2006
2009
1991
2003
2006
2009
Note: Applying 2010 and 2011 / Ave. of Jan - June 2012
Food CPI (2006=100) to 2009 Food threshold:
Note: Applying 2010 and 2011/ Ave. of Jan - June 2012 CPI for all
items (2006=100) to 2009 poverty threshold:
2010 : Phils = PhP 167
2010 threshold= PhP 240
2011 : Phils = PhP 176
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
2012 : Phils = PhP 177
2010 threshold= PhP 256
2011 threshold= PhP 251
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Subsistence Incidence (families)
Among FAMILIES:
• Subsistence incidence among families improved –
from 8.7% in 2006 to 7.9% in 2009.
• Out of 100 families --- 9 families were classified as food poor in 2006, this
was reduced to 8 out of 100 families in 2009.
Subsistence Incidence
among Families (%)
30.0
30.0
25.0
25.0
20.0
20.0
15.0
13.3
8.2
10.0
21.1
20.0
15.0
8.7
7.9
5.0
28.3
Poverty Incidence
among Families (%)
(0.2)
20.9
10.0
5.0
0.0
0.0
1991
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
16 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
2003 2006 2009
1991
2003 2006 2009
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Poverty Incidence (Families)
Among FAMILIES:
In terms of poverty incidence among families, there was only a slight
reduction during the three-year period – from 21.1% in 2006 to 20.9%
in 2009.
Subsistence Incidence
among Families (%)
30.0
30.0
25.0
25.0
20.0
20.0
15.0
13.3
8.2
10.0
5.0
21.1
20.0
15.0
8.7
(0.8)
28.3
7.9
Poverty Incidence
among Families (%)
(0.2)
20.9
10.0
5.0
0.0
0.0
1991
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
17 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
2003 2006 2009
1991
2003 2006 2009
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Subsistence Incidence (Population)
Among POPULATION:
•Subsistence incidence among population improved – from 11.7% in 2006 to
10.8% in 2009!
•Out of 100 Filipinos -- 12 Filipinos were classified as food poor in 2006,
this was reduced to 11 in 2009!
Subsistence Incidence
among Population (in %)
35
35
30
30
25
25
20
15
5
11.1
(0.9)
18
26.4 26.5
24.9
0.1
15
11.7
10.8
0
1991
2012 MCPI
Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
33.1
20
16.5
10
Poverty Incidence
among Population (in %)
10
5
0
2003 2006 2009
1991
2003 2006 2009
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Poverty Incidence (Population)
Among POPULATION:
In terms of poverty incidence among population, there was a very slight
increase during the three-year period – from 26.4% in 2006 to 26.5% in
2009.
Subsistence Incidence
among Population (in %)
35
35
30
30
25
25
20
15
5
11.1
(0.9)
19
26.4 26.5
24.9
0.1
15
11.7
10.8
0
1991
2012 MCPI
Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
33.1
20
16.5
10
Poverty Incidence
among Population (in %)
10
5
0
2003 2006 2009
1991
2003 2006 2009
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Magnitude of subsistence/poor families
MAGNITUDE among FAMILIES:
• Magnitude of subsistence poor families decreased by about 58,000 from 1.51
million in 2006 to 1.45 million out of 18.5M in 2009!
•However, in terms of magnitude of poor families, there was an increase of
about 185,000 from 3.67 million in 2006 to 3.86 million out of 18.5M in 2009!
2.00
Magnitude of Subsistence Poor
Families (in million)
4.00
1.60
1.51
1.50
(4.0%)
3.86
3.67
3.39
1.45
1.36
1.00
3.50
Magnitude of Poor Families
(in million)
5.2%
3.29
3.00
2.50
0.50
2.00
1991
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
20 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
2003 2006 2009
1991
2003 2006 2009
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Magnitude of subsistence/poor population
15.00
MAGNITUDE among POPULATION:
• Magnitude of subsistence poor population decreased by about 410,000 in
2009 – from 9.9 million in 2006 to 9.4 million out of 87.4M in 2009!
•The magnitude of poor population increased by almost 970,000 Filipinosfrom 22.2 million in 2006 to 23.1 out of 87.4M in 2009 by 4.4%.
Magnitude of Subsistence Poor
Magnitude of Poor Population
Population (in million)
(in million)
25.00
14.00
24.00
13.00
23.00
12.00
22.00
11.00
10.40
10.00
9.85
8.80
9.00
21.00
7.00
(4.2%)
15.00
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
21 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
2009
19.80
17.00
5.00
2006
4.4 %
18.00
16.00
2003
20.89
19.00
6.00
1991
22.17
20.00
9.44
8.00
23.14
1991
2003
2006
2009
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Summary
• While food poverty and poverty deteriorated between 2003 and 2006, these
improved between 2006 and 2009 – except for the increases in the poverty
incidence among population, magnitude of poor families and magnitude of
poor population.
•The increases, however, were not as much as between 2003 and 2006!
Summary of increases/decreases:
Indicator
2003 to 2006
2006 to 2009
AMONG FAMILIES
Subsistence Incidence, Families
+ 0.5
- 0.8
Poverty Incidence, Families
+ 1.1
- 0.2
Magnitude of Food Poor Families
+ 154,000
- 58,000
Magnitude of Poor Families
+ 378,000
+ 185,000
Subsistence Incidence, Population
+0.6
- 0.9
Poverty Incidence, Population
+ 1.5
+ 0.1
Magnitude of Food Poor Population
+1.05 million
- 0.41 million
Magnitude of Poor Population
+2.38 million
+ 0.97 million
AMONG POPULATION
22
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
In terms of poverty incidence among population in ASEAN countries,
the Philippines is better off than Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Cambodia; but
behind Vietnam (14.5%) and Indonesia (14.2%).
Country
Lao PDR
Myanmar
Cambodia
Philippines
Vietnam
Indonesia
Thailand
Malaysia
Brunei Darussalam
Singapore
Poverty Incidence
Among Popn.
33.5
32.0
30.1
26.5
14.5
14.2
8.5
3.6
…
…
Year
2003
2005
2007
2009
2008
2009
2008
2007
Note: Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB, but is not classified as a developing member country.
Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2010), Pacific Regional Information System (SPC 2010), country
sources. (http://www.adb.org/documents/books/key_indicators/2010/pdf/Key-Indicators-2010.pdf )
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
23 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Rise in Income vs Rise in Prices-Bottom 10%
Average per capita income of the bottom 10% of families rose faster than
prices of food!
Indicator
Subsistence Incidence (among families)
2006
2009
% Change
8.7
7.9
(0.8)
Inflation (food)
130.7
162.4
24.3
Inflation (all items)
137.9
160.0
16.0
Annual Per Capita Food Threshold
9,257
11,686
26.2
35,788
43,538
21.7
Mean/average per capita income (APCI)
All income groups
First decile class
7,389
9,681
31.0
Second decile class
Third decile class
Fourth decile class
11,263
14,599
14,542
18,542
29.1
27.0
18,249
23,003
26.0
Fifth decile class
22,781
28,281
24.1
Sixth decile class
28,493
35,068
23.1
Seventh decile class
36,551
44,358
21.4
Eight decile class
48,200
58,362
21.1
Ninth decile class
69,335
83,662
20.7
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
Tenth decile class
24 JOEncarnacion/
26 July 2012
NATIONAL
STATISTICAL 184,997
COORDINATION BOARD
151,130
22.4
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
A. NATIONAL: Rise in Income vs Rise in Prices-Bottom 30%
Average per capita income of the bottom 30% of families rose faster than
prices of all items!
Indicator
Poverty Incidence (among families)
2006
2009
% Change
21.1
20.9
(0.2)
Inflation (food)
130.7
162.4
24.3
Inflation (all items)
137.9
160.0
16.0
13,348
16,841
26.2
Annual Per Capita Poverty Threshold
Mean/average per capita income (APCI)
All income groups
First decile class
25
35,788
43,538
21.7
7,389
9,681
31.0
Second decile class
11,263
14,542
29.1
Third decile class
14,599
18,542
27.0
Fourth decile class
18,249
23,003
26.0
Fifth decile class
22,781
28,281
24.1
Sixth decile class
28,493
35,068
23.1
Seventh decile class
36,551
44,358
21.4
Eight decile class
48,200
58,362
21.1
69,335
83,662
20.7
151,130
184,997
22.4
Ninth decile class
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/
26decile
July 2012
Tenth
class
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL
Caraga and Region IX consistently posted the highest subsistence
incidence among families in 2006 and 2009! Improvements in Reg VII and Reg V!
Region
PHILIPPINES
26
Subsistence incidence among families
2003
2006
2009
8.2
8.7
7.9
Caraga
Region IX
Region X
16.6
25.1
16.1
Region VIII
Region VII
Region V
Region XII
Region XI
Region IV-B
ARMM
Region VI
CAR
Region I
Region II
Region III
Region IV-A
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NCR
11.1
16.0
18.0
10.6
12.3
11.1
7.3
9.1
5.8
5.8
4.1
2.3
2.4
0.3
16.9
17.9
16.3
19.7
18.6
15.6
13.5
14.4
17.1
13.2
15.7
12.9
10.8
11.3
12.1
11.0
2.8
10.5
11.6
8.5
7.9
7.9
8.3
7.6
7.1
5.5
4.3
4.1
3.7
3.7
2.8
2.4
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
0.7
0.4
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL
Caraga and ARMM consistently posted the highest poverty incidence
among families in 2006 and 2009!
Region
PHILIPPINES
27
Poverty incidence among families
2003
2006
2009
20.0
21.1
20.9
Caraga
ARMM
Region IX
37.6
25.0
40.5
Region V
Region VIII
Region X
Region VII
Region XII
Region IV-B
Region XI
Region VI
Region I
CAR
Region II
Region III
Region IV-A
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NCR
38.0
30.2
32.4
32.1
27.2
29.8
25.4
23.5
17.8
16.1
15.2
9.4
9.2
2.1
36.9
36.5
34.2
39.8
38.1
36.6
36.1 36.0
31.1 33.2
32.7 32.8
33.5 30.2
27.1 28.1
34.3 27.6
26.2 25.6
22.1 23.8
20.4 17.8
18.6 17.1
15.5 14.5
12.0 12.0
9.4 10.3
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
3.4
2.6
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL
Regions VII, V, and X continue to have the biggest share in the total number of food poor families!
PHILIPPINES
Magnitude of Food Poor Families
2003
2006
2009
1,357,833
1,511,579
1,453,843
Region VII
Region V
Region X
194,352
169,869
118,924
Region
28
Region VIII
83,573
Region IX
147,137
Region VI
114,929
Region XI
99,437
Caraga
69,100
Region XII
74,990
Region III
40,820
Region IV-B
55,517
Region IV-A
53,487
Region I
51,127
ARMM
36,952
Region II
23,790
CAR
16,151
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/
26 July 2012
NCR
7,677
220,692
158,936
128,513
181,649
137,527
131,304
110,071
117,655
108,585
101,484
75,221
80,522
69,957
81,692
62,166
66,775
61,863
26,850
25,245
15,354
124,547
122,893
115,298
96,969
92,803
90,305
75,585
62,151
58,468
54,839
48,686
26,792
24,625
9,400
% Share to Total Food Poor Families
2003
2006
2009
100.0
100.0
100.0
14.3
12.8
8.8
14.6
10.5
8.5
12.5
9.5
9.0
6.2
7.3
10.8
7.8
8.5
7.2
7.3
6.7
5.1
5.0
5.5
5.3
3.0
4.6
4.1
5.4
3.9
4.1
3.8
4.4
2.7
4.1
1.8
1.8
1.2
1.7
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
0.6
1.0
8.6
8.5
7.9
6.7
6.4
6.2
5.2
4.3
4.0
3.8
3.3
1.8
1.7
0.6
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL
Regions VII, V, and VI continue to have the biggest share in the total number poor families!
Magnitude of Poor Families
% Share to Total Poor Families
Region
2003
2006
2009
2003
2006
2009
PHILIPPINES
3,293,096
3,670,791
3,855,730
100.0
100.0
100
Region VII
Region V
Region VI
29
Region VIII
Region X
Region IV-A
Region III
Region IX
Region XI
Region XII
ARMM
Caraga
Region I
Region IV-B
Region II
NCR
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
CAR
JOEncarnacion/
26 July 2012
389,818
358,981
298,058
227,458
239,874
201,725
169,771
237,898
205,966
192,545
126,233
156,221
156,261
148,924
89,352
48,923
45,088
432,870
364,318
302,836
253,347
257,640
210,830
228,741
224,378
220,707
203,000
194,626
163,783
193,392
186,838
96,311
80,828
56,346
415,303
385,338
345,703
11.8
10.9
9.1
11.8
9.9
8.2
10.8
10.0
9.0
287,156
6.9
6.9
275,433
7.3
7.0
248,179
6.1
5.7
244,273
5.2
6.2
242,285
7.2
6.1
226,284
6.3
6.0
224,882
5.8
5.5
218,043
3.8
5.3
187,278
4.7
4.5
179,179
4.7
5.3
162,609
4.5
5.1
94,433
2.7
2.6
64,404
1.5
2.2
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
54,949
1.4
1.5
7.4
7.1
6.4
6.3
6.3
5.9
5.8
5.7
4.9
4.6
4.2
2.4
1.7
1.4
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL:
Batanes, the 4 districts of NCR, Benguet, Cavite, Bulacan, Laguna, Rizal, and Pampanga
were consistently included in the least poor cluster of provinces in 2003, 2006, and 2009!
•New entrants in the least poor cluster of provinces in 2009 were Ilocos Norte, Bataan,
and Nueva Vizcaya!
2003
Province
Poverty
incidence
90% CI
Lower limit
Upper
limit
2009
90% CI
Poverty
incidence
Lower
limit
Upper
limit
Poverty
incidence
90% CI
Lower
limit
Upper
limit
1st District
1.1
0.4
1.7
3.1
1.7
4.5
3.8
2
5.6
2nd District
2.6
1.7
3.4
3.8
2.1
5.5
2.4
1.6
3.2
3rd District
2.6
1.7
3.5
3.7
2.6
4.8
3.8
2.5
5.1
4th District
1.8
1.1
2.4
2.9
2
3.7
1.6
0.7
2.5
Bataan
8.1
5.1
11
7.2
4
10.5
7.4
4.8
10
Batanes
6.3
6.3
6.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
Benguet
4.4
1.7
7.1
3.6
2.1
5
4
2
6.1
Bulacan
4.3
2.9
5.7
5.1
3.7
6.6
4.8
3.7
5.9
Cavite
4.8
3.4
6.2
4.2
2.6
5.7
4.5
3.1
5.9
14.3
7.9
20.6
11.3
5.8
16.9
9.2
6.1
12.3
Laguna
5.2
3.5
6.9
4.5
3
6
5.9
4.1
7.6
Nueva Vizcaya
3.2
1.8
4.6
5.8
1.4
10.3
6.7
2.9
10.5
4.9
3.5
6.3
3.8
2.4
5.2
6.7
4.9
8.4
2.9
1.9
3.9
COORDINATION
BOARD
2.7 NATIONAL
1.6 STATISTICAL
3.7
6.5
4.2
Ilocos Norte
30
2006
Pampanga
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
Rizal
JOEncarnacion/
26 July 2012
8.7
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
Agusan del Sur, Bohol, Maguindanao, Masbate, Surigao del Norte and Zamboanga del Norte were
consistently included in the bottom cluster of provinces in 2003, 2006, and 2009!
2003
Province
90% CI
Poverty
incidence
Lower limit
2009
90% CI
Poverty
incidence
Upper limit
90% CI
Upper
limit
Lower limit
Poverty
incidence
Lower limit
Upper limit
Agusan del Sur
48.5
41.3
55.6
45.5
38.2
52.9
51.2
43.5
58.9
Apayao
10.7
3.4
18.0
37
24.6
49.4
36.3
23.2
49.4
Bohol
40.2
33.8
46.7
43.7
35.8
51.6
41.0
33.6
48.4
Camarines Norte
40.7
28.6
52.9
30.4
21.6
39.2
32.3
25.3
39.2
Camarines Sur
38.3
32.5
44.1
36.6
31
42.3
38.7
33.8
43.6
Camiguin
35.1
31.5
38.7
37.8
21.9
53.7
36.4
25.9
46.8
Davao Oriental
35.6
26.7
44.4
39
28
50.1
42.5
36.4
48.6
Eastern Samar
29.8
20.5
39
37.6
31.8
43.5
45.8
37.6
54.1
Lanao del Norte
35.6
27
44.1
34.3
28.1
40.6
39
31.9
46.1
Maguindanao
41.9
34.4
49.5
44.9
39
50.9
44.6
37.7
51.6
Masbate
50.2
42.3
58
42.9
33.9
51.8
42.5
36.6
48.3
37
30.6
43.4
38.2
30.7
45.7
36.9
29.7
44.1
Negros Oriental
43.6
35.6
51.5
44.4
36.1
52.7
36.4
29.5
43.2
Northern Samar
37.4
27.9
47.0
43.3
32.9
53.8
41.7
32.4
51
Occidental Mindoro
32.6
24.9
40.3
40.6
30.4
50.7
25.4
18.3
32.4
Romblon
35.8
27.9
43.7
40.6
34.7
46.6
43
36.3
49.8
Saranggani
36.7
28.4
45.1
34.0
29.2
38.8
40.7
34
47.3
Siquijor
45.5
27.4
63.5
25.8
13.9
37.6
32.8
21.3
44.3
Sultan Kudarat
37.3
28.1
46.5
38.7
30.9
46.5
35.2
28.8
41.7
Sulu
20.3
13.4
27.1
36.7
29.1
44.2
39.3
33
45.5
Surigao Del Norte
42.3
35.2
49.4
41.6
34.9
48.3
47.9
43.1
52.8
Tawi-tawi
18.2
8.1
28.2
49.1
39.8
58.4
31.5
22.2
40.8
Conference 59.5
JOEncarnacion/
Zamboanga
Sibugay 26 July 2012 43.3
51.4
67.5
54.1
46.4
61.7
52.9
46
59.8
33.3
53.2
34.1
25.7
42.5
43.2
35.4
50.9
Misamis Occidental
31
2006
Zamboanga
Norte
2012 MCPIdel
Annual
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL:
Cebu and Negros Occidental continue to have the biggest share in the total
number of poor families!
Province
Magnitude of Poor Families
2003
% Share to Total Poor Families
2006
2009
2003
2006
2009
3,293,096
3,670,791
3,855,730
100
100
100
Cebu
185,624
211,406
213,162
5.6
5.8
5.5
Negros Occidental
112,512
130,077
144,828
3.4
3.5
3.8
Camarines Sur
116,460
119,747
126,280
3.5
3.3
3.3
PHILIPPINES
Pangasinan
92,191
128,396
114,400
2.8
3.5
3.0
Nueva Ecija
64,808
94,026
112,367
2.0
2.6
2.9
Leyte
99,082
104,260
110,214
3.0
2.8
2.9
102,074
101,511
109,745
3.1
2.8
2.8
Bohol
90,735
104,032
102,522
2.8
2.8
2.7
Quezon
84,031
101,394
98,426
2.6
2.8
2.6
Davao del Sur
88,165
89,452
94,049
2.7
2.4
2.4
105,334
112,585
91,387
3.2
3.1
2.4
Zamboanga del Norte
Negros Oriental
32
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL: High Poverty Incidence
In terms of poverty incidence, most provinces with more than 40% of total
families are poor were located in Visayas and Mindanao. However, in terms of
magnitude of poor families, provinces with more than 100,000 were mostly
located in Luzon and Visayas.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
33 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
Subsistence and poverty incidence among families in 2009 were notably
high in Mindanao provinces.
Provinces with high poverty
and subsistence incidence
1. Zamboanga del Norte
2. Agusan del Sur
3. Eastern Samar
4. Surigao del Norte
5. Zamboanga Sibugay
6. Northern Samar
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
34 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
C. POVERTY STATISTICS AMONG THE BASIC SECTORS
Who are the basic sectors?
•
In Republic Act 8425, or the Social Reform and Poverty
Alleviation Act, it was declared that the State should adopt
an area-based sectoral and focused intervention to poverty
alleviation.
•
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Section 3 of RA 8425 defined the basic sectors as the
disadvantaged sectors of Philippine society, namely:
Farmer-peasant
Artisanal fisherfolk
Workers in the formal sector and migrant workers
Workers in the informal sector
Indigenous peoples and cultural communities
Women
Differently-abled persons
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
35 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
C. POVERTY STATISTICS AMONG THE BASIC SECTORS
Who are the basic sectors?
8. Senior citizens;
9. Victims of calamities and disasters;
10. Youth and students;
11. Children;
12. Urban poor;
13. Cooperatives; and
14. Non-government organization.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
36 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
C. POVERTY STATISTICS AMONG THE BASIC SECTORS
The NSCB generates poverty statistics for 9 of the 14 basic sectors
due to data constraints. The 9 basic sectors are operationally
defined as:
Sector
Operational Definition
1. Farmer
Employed household members 15 years old and
over whose primary occupation is farming and
plant growing, or animal production.
2. Fishermen
Employed household members 15 years old and
over whose primary occupation is fishing.
3. Workers in the Formal
Sector and Migrant
Workers
Workers in the Formal Sector – Employed
persons working for private establishments and
government organizations and corporations.
Migrant Workers – Individuals who are overseas
Filipino workers (OFW).
4. Women
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
37 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
An individual whose declared sex is female.
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
C. POVERTY STATISTICS AMONG THE BASIC SECTORS
The NSCB generates poverty statistics for 9 of the 14 basic sectors
due to data constraints. The 9 basic sectors are operationally
defined as:
Sector
Operational Definition
5. Senior citizens
Persons 60 years old and above.
6. Youth
Youth – Persons 15 to 30 years old.
7. Children
Persons below 18 years old
8. Individuals residing in
urban areas
An individual residing in an urban area whose
income falls below the official poverty
threshold.
9. Self-employed and
unpaid family workers
Employed individuals 15 years old and over
who are either self employed or worked without
pay on family owned business
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
38 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
Fishermen posted the highest poverty incidence among the nine basic sectors
in the Philippines in 2009 at 41.4%, the same level in 2006, followed by farmers
and children at poverty incidences of 36.7% and 35.1% in 2009, respectively.
41.4%
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
39 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
36.7%
35.1%
2003
2006
2009
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
Poverty incidence for four basic sectors increased between 2006 and 2009:
youth and migrant and formal sector workers, both with 1.0 percentage
point increases, and children and individuals residing in urban areas, both
with 0.3 percentage point increases.
2003
Sector
2006
90% Confidence
Interval
Poverty
Incidence
90% Confidence
Interval
Pov.
Inc.
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
Increase/
Decrease
2009
90% Confidence
Interval
Pov.
Inc.
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
Lower
Limit
Upper
Limit
2003
2006
2006
2009
Philippines5/
24.9
24.1
25.8
26.4
25.5
27.3
26.5
25.6
27.3
1.5
0.1
Fishermen
35.0
32.4
37.6
41.4
38.6
44.2
41.4
38.9
43.9
6.4
0.0
Farmers
37.0
35.5
38.4
37.2
35.7
38.7
36.7
35.4
38.1
0.2
(0.5)
Children
32.7
31.5
33.9
34.8
33.6
36
35.1
34.1
36.2
2.1
0.3
Self-employed and Unpaid
Family Workers 1/
28.0
26.8
29.3
29.4
28.2
30.7
29.0
27.9
30.2
1.4
(0.4)
Women
24.0
23
25
25.1
24.1
26.1
25.1
24.3
26
1.1
0.0
Youth
19.0
18.1
19.9
20.8
19.9
21.7
21.8
20.9
22.6
1.8
1.0
Migrant and Formal Sector
14.6
13.8
15.4
15.7
14.9
16.5
16.7
16
17.4
1.1
1.0
Senior Citizens
15.1
14.2
15.9
16.2
15.3
17.2
15.8
15.1
16.5
1.2
(0.5)
Individuals residing in urban areas
11.1
10.3
11.9
12.5
11.7
13.3
12.8
12.0
13.5
1.4
0.3
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
1/ Self-employed and Unpaid Family Workers is an additional sector, which
serves asSTATISTICAL
a proxy indicator
for informal
sector
NATIONAL
COORDINATION
BOARD
40 JOEncarnacion/
26 July 2012
workers, considering data available in the PSS.
Children, women, and individuals residing in urban areas accounted for the
largest number of poor population in the country in 2009 at 12.4 million, 11.2
million, and 5.7 million, respectively.
2003
Sector
41
Magnitude
of Poor
2006
90% Confidence Interval
Magnitude
of Poor
Lower Limit
Upper
Limit
19,110,455
20,483,453
22,173,190
2009
90% Confidence Interval
Lower
Limit
Upper Limit
21,435,613
22,964,387
Magnitude
of Poor
90% Confidence Interval
Lower
Limit
Upper Limit
22,363,307
23,836,693
Philippines
19,796,954
Children
11,363,850
11,228,469
11,499,230
12,272,819
12,126,241
12,419,398
12,414,811
12,286,448
12,543,174
Women
9,605,037
9,509,134
9,700,940
10,691,078
10,584,303
10,797,853
11,169,745
11,075,812
11,263,677
Individuals
residing in
urban areas
4,429,424
4,394,400
4,464,448
5,310,531
5,267,025
5,354,037
5,709,170
5,664,660
5,753,680
Youth
4,280,197
4,242,071
4,318,323
4,850,607
4,805,832
4,895,382
5,367,308
5,323,314
5,411,302
Self-employed
and Unpaid
Family
Workers
3,566,586
3,522,046
3,611,126
4,115,632
4,064,734
4,166,530
4,186,194
4,139,565
4,232,823
Migrant and
Formal Sector
2,283,773
2,265,940
2,301,606
2,599,336
2,578,880
2,619,792
3,118,701
3,095,868
3,141,534
Farmers
1,768,249
1,742,363
1,794,135
1,773,484
1,747,354
1,799,614
1,685,148
1,662,409
1,707,887
Senior
Citizens
793,233
786,342
800,124
1,035,089
1,025,583
1,044,595
1,181,121
1,172,658
1,189,584
346,524
365,107
400,214
389,019
411,409
346,345
337,765
354,924
355,815
Fishermen
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
23,142,481
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
D. City and Municipal Level Poverty Statistics
•
Official provincial poverty statistics are computed based on the
final results of the Family Income and Expenditure Survey.
•
The FIES is costly to implement, with regions as current domains.
The design of the FIES does not permit reliable analysis of smaller
subgroups, such as cities and municipalities.
•
There is a strong clamor from policymakers and program
implementers for more geographically disaggregated
information on the poorest cities/municipalities.
•
In response to this need for poverty statistics at lower levels of
disaggregation, the NSCB, with funding assistance from the World
Bank implemented two projects on small area estimation (SAE) to
generate poverty incidences at the city/municipal levels.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
42 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
D. City and Municipal Level Poverty Statistics
Two projects undertaken by the NSCB with WB funding
Project
Poverty Mapping in
the Philippines
Output
Year Released
2000 city/municipal
level poverty
estimates
2005
Intercensal Updating 2003 city/municipal
of Small Area Poverty level poverty
Estimates
estimates
2008
• Used the Elbers, Lanjouw and Lanjouw (ELL) technique
developed by a WB research team.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
43 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
D. City and Municipal Level Poverty Statistics
2003 Poverty Incidence among Population
By province
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
44 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
By city/municipality
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
D. City and Municipal Level Poverty Statistics
Actual Policy Uses
1. In targeting beneficiaries of programs/projects
-Implementation of nationwide programs on the:
1) National Household Targeting System for Poverty
Reduction;
2) Conditional Cash Transfers;
3) Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social
Services; and
4) Training/deployment of unemployed registered nurses in
the 1,000 poorest cities/municipalities of the country.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
45 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
D. City and Municipal Level Poverty Statistics
Actual Policy Uses
1.
In targeting beneficiaries of programs/projects (cont.)
- Identification of priority households for:
1) the implementation of a number of local livelihood projects for the five
poorest municipalities of the provinces of Region VI under the Integrated
Services for Livelihood Advancement of Fisherfolks (ISLA) and Tulong
Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged Workers (TUPAD);
2) targeting enrolment in health insurance sponsored projects of the
Philippine Health Insurance Corporation, specifically in Regions VIII and
XII;
3) estimation of the volume of rice needed for the Food for Children
program in Leyte province; and
4) implementation of programs/projects of the MPAI-World Vision for
schooling of indigent children and micro-enterprise development.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
46 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
D. City and Municipal Level Poverty Statistics
Actual Policy Uses
2.
In policy formulation and planning
-Design and implementation of local poverty action plans, particularly in
Region VI; and
-Development and monitoring of the Medium-Term Regional Development
Plan (MTRDP), Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plan, and
Provincial Plan for Children in selected areas/localities.
3. In poverty monitoring
- Monitoring the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in
Regions I, IV, and VIII; and
- Monitoring the State of Children and nutritional status of the population in
Regions IV and VIII, respectively.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
47 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
D. City and Municipal Level Poverty Statistics
•
The NSCB is currently updating the small area estimates of
poverty for 2009.
•
This is jointly funded by the Government of the Philippines and
the World Bank.
•
Consultations/validations were undertaken by the NSCB
Technical Staff, with the Project Consultant and Technical
Adviser:
• Technical Committee on Poverty Statistics on June 1, 2012
• A validation of the preliminary estimates was undertaken on
July 22-25, 2012.
•
The 2009 poverty incidence among population for all cities and
municipalities will be released by the NSCB through a national
dissemination forum on July 30, 2012.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
48 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
49 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
A. Poverty and Unemployment/Underemployment: Need for quality
employment
Poverty incidence for the employed population increased from 22.1%
in 2006 to 22.4% in 2009. Similarly, poverty incidence for the
unemployed population increased from 15.8% in 2006 to 22.4% in 2009.
Poverty incidence for employed population is higher than the poverty
incidence for unemployed population both in 2006 and 2009!
Statistics
2006
2009
Increase/Decr
ease
06-09
Poverty Incidence
Employed Population
Unemployed Population
22.1
15.8
22.4
22.4
0.3
6.6
Magnitude of Poor
Employed Population
Unemployed Population
7,254,861
372,062
7,880,786
465,106
625,925
93,044
• Employment is not sufficient, quality of employment matters!
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
50 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
B. Poverty and Minimum Wage-Setting: Need for more poverty-sensitive minimum wage
REGIONAL (FOR Caraga):
•
A minimum wage earner* in Caraga can support a family of at most four members in 2009,
to be classified as non-poor!
•
However, average family size in Caraga is 5!
Family size
51
Required monthly
income (in PhP)
Monthly Income of a Minimum Wage Earner in 2009
Non-agriculture (PhP 233/day)
Agriculture (PhP 223/day)
1
1,405
6,058
5,798
2
2,810
6,058
5,798
3
4,215
6,058
5,798
4
5,620
6,058
5,798
5
7,025
6,058
5,798
6
8,430
6,058
5,798
7
9,835
6,058
5,798
8
11,240
6,058
5,798
•Minimum wage earner in Caraga employed in the agriculture and non-agriculture sector.
•Rate is effective 20 June 2008, per Wage order No. 9 (Source of data:
http://www.nwpc.dole.gov.ph/pages/statistics/stat_wage%20rates1989-present_non-agri.html )
•For this exercise, number of working days considered in a month is 26.
• Gross family income was used.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
B. Poverty and Minimum Wage-Setting: Need for more poverty-sensitive minimum wage
REGIONAL (FOR ARMM):
•
A minimum wage earner* in ARMM can support a family of at most four members in 2009,
to be classified as non-poor!
•
However, average family size in ARMM is 5.
Family size
Required monthly
income (in PhP)
Monthly Income of a Minimum Wage Earner in 2009
Non-agriculture (PhP 210/day)
Agriculture (PhP 210/day)
1
1,361
5,460
5,460
2
2,722
5,460
5,460
3
4,083
5,460
5,460
4
5,444
5,460
5,460
5
6,805
5,460
5,460
6
8,166
5,460
5,460
7
9,527
5,460
5,460
8
10,888
5,460
5,460
•Minimum wage earner in ARMM employed in the agriculture and non-agriculture sector.
•Rate is effective 29 June 2008, per Wage order No. 11 (Source of data: http://www.nwpc.dole.gov.ph/pages/statistics/stat_wage%20rates1989
present_non-agri.html )
•For this exercise, number of working days considered in a month is 26.
• Gross family income was used.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
52 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
B. Poverty and Minimum Wage-Setting: Need for more poverty-sensitive minimum wage
REGIONAL (FOR Region IX):
•
A minimum wage earner* in Region IX can support a family of at most four members in
2009, to be classified as non-poor!
•
However, average family size in Region IX is 5.
Family size
Required monthly
income (in PhP)
Monthly Income of a Minimum Wage Earner in 2009
Non-agriculture (PhP 240/day)
Agriculture (PhP 215/day)
1
1,263
6,240
5,590
2
2,526
6,240
5,590
3
3,789
6,240
5,590
4
5,052
6,240
5,590
5
6,315
6,240
5,590
6
7,578
6,240
5,590
7
8,841
6,240
5,590
8
10,104
6,240
5,590
•Minimum wage earner in Region IX employed in the non-agriculture sector.
•Rate is effective 3 July 2008, per Wage order No. 15 (Source of data: http://www.nwpc.dole.gov.ph/pages/statistics/stat_wage%20rates1989present_non-agri.html )
•For this exercise, number of working days considered in a month is 26.
• Gross family income was used.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
53 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
C. Poverty and Economic Growth: Need for better income distribution,
inclusive growth
Region
PHILIPPINES
NCR
CAR
Region I
Region II
Region III
Region IV-A
Region IV-B
Region V
Region VI
Region VII
Region VIII
Region IX
Region X
Region XI
Region XII
Caraga
ARMM
Poverty
Gross Regional Domestic
Incidence
Product (in thousand Inc/Dec
Inc/Dec
Among Families
pesos) constant
(%)
2006
2009
06-09 2006
2009 06-09
1,276,155,599 1,432,115,499
12.2
21.1
20.9
(0.2)
414,437,924 465,688,965
28,396,925 31,547,310
38,172,734 40,737,475
25,523,961 28,157,464
107,039,140 115,947,511
156,688,378 165,572,379
12.4
11.1
6.7
10.3
8.3
5.7
3.4
18.6
20.4
15.5
12.0
9.4
2.6
17.1
17.8
14.5
12.0
10.3
(0.8)
(1.5)
(2.6)
(1.1)
0.1
0.9
34,292,906 39,105,919
35,394,007 42,877,886
91,865,954 109,252,408
90,297,893 102,052,820
28,093,607 30,482,024
32,676,015 38,196,714
62,729,335 73,206,779
57,877,947 67,366,644
14.0
34.3
36.1
22.1
33.5
31.1
34.2
32.7
26.2
27.6
36.0
23.8
30.2
33.2
36.6
32.8
25.6
(6.7)
44,740,935
11,290,530
16,637,408
13.0
27.1
36.9
36.5
28.1
39.8
38.1
1.0
50,556,259
12,409,350
18,957,590
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
54 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
21.1
18.9
13.0
8.5
16.9
16.7
16.4
9.9
13.9
(0.1)
1.7
(3.2)
2.1
2.4
0.2
(0.6)
3.0
1.7
The increase in
economic
growth
between 2006
and 2009 in
Region IVB is
well distributed
across all
income decile
class. Poverty
incidence
decreased by
6.7% between
2006 and 2009.
Region IVB
Statistics/
Income decile class
% change
2006
2009
21,631
29,727
37.4
6,049
8,488
40.3
06-09
Mean per capita incom e
All incom e groups
Firs t decile clas s
8,755
12,342
41.0
Third decile clas s
10,536
14,969
42.1
Fourth Decile clas s
12,665
17,588
38.9
Fifth Decile clas s
15,192
20,823
37.1
Sixth Decile clas s
18,255
24,924
36.5
Seventh Decile clas s
22,172
30,386
37.0
Eighth Decile clas s
27,861
39,161
40.6
Ninth Decile clas s
39,545
55,363
40.0
Tenth Decile clas s
89,490
123,781
38.3
Second decile clas s
In contrast, in
Region XII, the
% change
Income decile class
2006
2009
06-09
increase in
Mean per capita incom e
economic
All incom e groups
24,281
32,975
35.8
growth is
Firs t decile clas s
6,939
8,327
20.0
concentrated
Second decile clas s
9,652
12,093
25.3
in the upper
Third decile clas s
11,996
14,730
22.8
Fourth Decile clas s
14,415
17,739
23.1
income decile
Fifth Decile clas s
17,016
21,287
25.1
classes.
Sixth Decile clas s
20,336
25,750
26.6
Poverty
Seventh Decile clas s
24,617
31,600
28.4
Eighth Decile clas s
31,337
40,723
30.0
incidence also
Ninth Decile clas s
44,275
60,265
36.1
increased by
Tenth Decile clas s
96,152
146,630
52.5
1.0% between
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION
BOARD
2006
and 2009.
Statistics/
Region XII
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
D. Poverty and Population Management
Poor families have bigger family size!
Average Family Size
All
2009
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
55 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
4.74
Food Poor
6.48
Poor
5.99
Non-Poor
4.38
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications – E. Poverty &
Education
• Families whose heads have lower educational attainment have
higher poverty incidence!
Poverty Incidence Among Families by Educational Attainment of
the Household Head: 2003 and 2006
Educational Attainment
2003
2006
Inc./Dec.
No Grade Completed
44.4
45.5
1.0
Elementary Undergraduate
36.8
36.5
(0.2)
Elementary Graduate
25.4
28.8
3.4
High School Undergraduate
20.7
22.6
1.9
High School Graduate
11.1
13.1
2.0
College Undergraduate
4.5
5.5
1.0
College Graduate
1.7
2.3
0.6
Post Graduate
2.2
0.0
(2.2)
Source: Special computations made by the NSCB Technical Staff using the official poverty statistics of the NSCB and the result
of the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of the National Statistics Office (NSO).
2012 MCPI Annual
Note: Poverty estimates were only generated for 2003 and 2006 as the FIES datafile available to the NSCB contains very limited
variables (i.e., 13 variables).
Conference
56 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
G. Poverty and targeting: The first round of CCT/4Ps in 2008-2009 did not benefit all
subsistence poor provinces. CCT was not provided in any of the municipalities in
Eastern Samar, which is one of the provinces with the highest subsistence
incidence (25.7%) and highest poverty incidence (45.8%) among families in 2009.
•A total of 55 municipalities in least subsistence poor provinces also benefited from
the CCT program!
No CCT
in
Eastern
Samar
in 20082009
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
57 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
G. Poverty and targeting: In 2009, out of 138 cities and 1,496 municipalities, the following
benefited from the CCT Program of the DSWD:
With high poverty incidence – 139 municipalities and 75 cities
With low poverty incidence – 28 municipalities and 18 cities
• A total of 22 municipalities in least poor provinces also benefited from the CCT program!
No CCT
in
Eastern
Samar
in 20082009
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
58 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
G. Poverty and targeting: Contiguous regions with high concentration of
poor families could be prioritized in targeting/intervention programs.
Province
Pangasinan
5.9%
Nueva
Ecija
3.3%
Camarines
Sur
Negros
Occidental
Zamboanga
2.8% del Norte
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
59 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
Cebu
Leyte
Bohol
14.9%
No. of
Municipality
with CCT
Total no. of
municipalities
and cities
Pangasinan
7
48
Nueva Ecija
11
32
Camarines Sur
5
37
Negros
Occidental
8
32
Bohol
1
48
Cebu
6
53
Leyte
10
43
Zamboanga del
Norte
27
27
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications - Poverty and the
MDGs
. Poverty and the MDGs
With the latest 2009 poverty estimates, the probability of
halving poverty, between 1990 and 2015, has gone down but
remains at medium!
Indicator
Poverty
incidence
among
population
Target
1991
16.6
33.1
2003
2006
2009
24.9
26.4
26.5
0.99
0.65
0.53
(Baseline)
Pace of
Progress
Notes: The pace of progress is computed as the ratio of the actual annual growth rate and required annual growth
rate.
High: Pace of Progress is greater than 0.9
Medium: Pace of Progress between 0.5 and 0.9
Low: Pace of Progress is less than 0.5
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
60 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
We need to reduce poverty incidence among population by 1.65
percentage points annually , from 2010 to 2015!
This means that, on the average, there should be an annual reduction of
1.67 million in the magnitude of poor Filipinos from 2010 to 2015
Actual
Poverty Incidence among
population
1991
33.1
2003
24.9
2006
26.4
2009
26.5
Target (given the present
performance)
Percentage point
decrease
Poverty Incidence
among population
Annual reduction of
0.37 percentage
points, between
1991-2009, from a
baseline of 33.1
0.69 annually,
between 19912015, from a
baseline of 33.1
20.7
2012
2015
61
18.6
16.6
TARGET
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July2015
2012
Reduction in Poor Population
Annual
Cumulative
1,598,224
1,628,372 3,226,597
1,658,671 4,885,268
1,689,113 6,574,381
1,719,689 8,294,071
1,750,410 10,044,481
Percentage point
decrease
Poverty Incidence
among Population
1.65 annually,
between 20102015, from a
baseline of 26.5%
25.05
23.35
21.65
19.95
18.25
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
16.55
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
. Poverty and the MDGs
As of 2009, the Philippines was eight years behind target on
poverty reduction!
Only NCR, CAR, Regions II and IV-A are ahead of their targets!
10.0
5.0
3.2
5.0
0.5
0.5
0.0
-2.3
-5.0
-10.0
-3.8
-8.3
-8.4
-4.0
-5.6
-9.6
-8.3
-10.2
-15.0
-12.0
-14.1
Re
gi
on
I
Re
gi
on
II
Re
gi
on
III
Re
gi
on
IV
-A
Re
gi
on
IV
-B
Re
gi
on
V
Re
gi
on
VI
Re
gi
on
VI
I
Re
gi
on
VI
II
Re
gi
on
X
Re
gi
on
XI
Re
gi
on
XI
I
CA
R
R
NC
Ph
ilip
pi
ne
s
-20.0
Notes: Time-distance (years): positive (+) – time lead (progress is ahead the path to target)
Negative ( - ) – time lag (Progress is behind the path to target)
The time distance is a new generic statistical measure for analysis and visualization of time series data. This was first
developed by Prof. Pavle Sicherl of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.
62
Region IX, Caraga, and ARMM are 27, 21, and 81 years behind the target in 2009.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
SOME POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION/QUESTIONS:
1.
Towards poverty alleviation amidst resource constraints, need to
balance support for the core poor, the poor and the middle class
To sustain poverty reduction, need to maintain a healthy middle
class? Improve education?
2.
Should target be focused on reducing poverty incidence or
reducing subsistence incidence?
3.
Employment is not sufficient: quality of employment matters
4.
Minimum wage setting – too many low paying jobs?
5.
Importance of decent job creation
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
63 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
SO MANY DEMANDS/CHALLENGES TO THE PHILIPPINE STATISTICAL
SYSTEM on the generation of official poverty statistics:
•
Annual poverty incidences and other measures of poverty;
• More timely official poverty statistics (i.e., regular generation of
“advance” thresholds);
• Regular generation of small area estimates of poverty (i.e., at the
city/municipal level);
• Harmonization/standardization of existing statistical frameworks on
poverty reduction statistics (e.g., official poverty statistics, NHTSPR,
CBMS, among others) ;
• Communicating official poverty statistics towards more actual policy
uses;
• Well-being/Happiness of the poor;
… AND THE LIST GOES ON… AND ON… BUT (next slide)
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
64 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
TO AID THE PHILIPPINE STATISTICAL SYSTEM IN RESPONDING TO
THESE MANY DEMANDS/CHALLENGES:
1. There is a need for statistical capacity building, specially of
the line agencies and the LGUs
•
•
•
Many LGUs do not have a statistical unit or statistical personnel;
Low compensation scheme for statistical personnel;
Non-statisticians doing statistical work.
2. Statistics must be demand-driven; POLICY MAKERS must
translate statistics into programs and policies
3. Statistical agencies must be relevant to stakeholders
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
65 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
TO AID THE PHILIPPINE STATISTICAL SYSTEM IN RESPONDING TO
THESE MANY DEMANDS/CHALLENGES:
There is a great need for more resources for statistics, specially
manpower!
• INVEST IN STATISTICS! INVEST IN STATISTICAL OFFICES!
INVEST IN STATISTICIANS!
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
66 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
Maraming Salamat po!
URL: http://www.nscb.gov.ph
e-mail: info@nscb.gov.ph
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
67 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
Who are the members of the Technical Committee on Poverty
Statistics (TC PovStat)?
The Committee is composed of professionals/experts who have undertaken
significant studies on poverty. Membership in the committee is based on
individual expertise and not on representation by agency/institution.
Chairperson: DR. CELIA M. REYES
Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS)
Vice Chairpersons:
Dr. Romulo A. Virola
Administrator Carmelita N. Ericta
NSCB
National Statistics Office (NSO)
Chairpersons of the Four Small Working Groups:
Dr. Lisa Grace S. Bersales
Dr. Arsenio S. Balisacan
Dr. Zita VJ Albacea
Ms. Dolores de Quiros-Castillo
UP School of Statistics
UP Institute of Statistics
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
68 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
National Economic and Development Authority /
UP School of Economics
Former Asst. Sec., National Anti-Poverty Commission
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
I. Introduction
Who are the members of the Technical Committee on Poverty
Statistics (TC PovStat)?
Members:
Dir. Erlinda M. Capones
Dep. Adm. Paula Monina G. Collado
Usec. Alicia R. Bala
OIC-Dir. Myrna Asuncion
Asst. Sec. Gen. Lina Castro
Dr. Jose Ramon Albert
Ms. Emma Fabian
OIC-Dir. Jessamyn O. Encarnacion
Dir. Manuel Gotis
Dr. Arturo Pacificador
Dir. Romeo S. Recide
Prof. Ofelia M. Templo
National Economic Dev’t. Authority NSO
Dept. of Social Welfare and Dev’t.
NSCB
NSO
Dept. of Interior & Local Gov’t.
NEDA
PIDS
NSCB
De La Salle University
Bureau of Agricultural Statistics
Ateneo de Manila University
Dr. Jocelyn Juguan
Ms. Susanita Tesiorna
Food & Nutrition Research Institute
69 JOEncarnacion/
26 July 2012
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
Trade Union
Congress
of the
PhilippinesBOARD
NATIONAL
STATISTICAL
COORDINATION
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
Some positive events between 2006 and 2009:
Period
Event
July 2009
Increase in the salaries of government employees with
the implementation of the 1st of four parts of the Salary
Standardization Law III.
2008
Conditional cash transfer (CCT) implemented in 161
municipalities in 2008 – 41.6% in Luzon, 14.9% in
Visayas, and 43.5% in Mindanao.
2009
CCT was implemented in 277 municipalities – 36.5% in
Luzon, 22.4% in Visayas, and 41.1% in Mindanao.
February
2009
Start of application for the Project on Nurses Assigned
in Rural Service by the DOLE, DOH, and the
Professional Regulation Commission, Board of Nursing
(PRC-BON). The Project involved the
training/deployment of unemployed registered nurses in
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
ofCOORDINATION
the country.
NATIONAL STATISTICAL
BOARD
70 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012 the 1,000 poorest cities/municipalities
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
Some negative events between 2006 and 2009:
Period
2006-2009
2008
Event
Rice price crisis: Price of ordinary rice
increased by 44.2%, from PhP 21.28/kg
in 2006 to PhP 30.69 in 2009
Global financial crisis
June 2009
Start of El Niño
July 2009
Start of the increase in alert level of
Mayon Volcano
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
71 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
Some negative events between 2006 and 2009:
Some typhoons/calamities in 2009
Typhoon/Calamity
Period Covered
Estimated Cost of
Damage
Area(s) affected
1. Pepeng
Sept. 24 - 27,
2009
PhP 27.195 billion
NCR, CAR, I, II, III,
IV-A, IV-B, V, IX
2. Ondoy
Sept. 30 – Oct.
11, 2009
PhP 11.121 billion
NCR, CAR, I, II, III,
IV-A, IV-B, V, IX
3. Ramil
Oct. 20-26, 2009
PhP 87 million in
Cagayan Valley
CAR, Regions I
and II
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
72 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
In NCR, the average per capita income of the bottom 10%
of families rose faster than prices of food and all items!
Statistics/
Income decile class
Food Threshold
Subsistence Incidence
(among families)
Inflation (food)
Poverty Threshold
Poverty Incidence
(among families)
Inflation (all items)
Mean per capita income
All income groups
First decile class
Second decile class
Third decile class
Fourth Decile class
Fifth Decile class
Sixth Decile class
Seventh Decile class
Eighth Decile class
Ninth Decile class
Tenth Decile class
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
73 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NCR
2003
% change
03-06
06-09
17.8
20.1
2006
2009
9,776
11,515
13,831
0.3
108.5
13,997
0.7
127.8
16,487
0.4
153.5
19,802
0.4
17.8
17.8
(0.3)
20.1
20.1
2.1
114.5
3.4
140.7
2.6
156.9
1.3
22.9
(0.8)
11.5
57,683
66,106
77,462
14.6
17.2
16,132
23,567
29,031
34,145
40,100
48,199
58,124
74,030
102,336
235,805
17,496
21,714
8.5
24.1
26,395
31,097
12.0
17.8
33,051
39,112
13.8
18.3
40,037
47,069
17.3
17.6
47,945
56,273
19.6
17.4
57,777
67,964
19.9
17.6
71,696
83,226
23.4
16.1
92,717
107,377
25.2
15.8
127,839
145,456
24.9
13.8
263,928
309,122
11.9
17.1
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL: Magnitude of Poor Population
Biggest reductions in the number of poor population from 2006 to 2009 were observed in NCR,
Regions IV-B and I. On the other hand, largest increases were observed in Regions VI, VIII and IVA, with 264,651, 263,315, and 166,550 increases in the poor population, respectively.
2,500,000
2003
2006
264,651
2,000,000
2009
166,550
263,315
-107,790
1,500,000
-141,498
1,000,000
-146,477
500,000
V
VII
VI
VIII
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
CCT
17
39
23
46
74
JOEncarnacion/
26
July
2012
(114)
(132)
(133)
(143)
(08-09)
XI
Caraga
III
ARMM
IX
XII
34
7
35
49
14
16 NATIONAL
19
52
19COORDINATION
27
5
8
28
STATISTICAL
BOARD
(93)
(142)
(130)
(118)
(72)
(50)
(125)
(73)
II
R
IV-A
(73)
IV-B
C
A
R
N
C
II
X
(49)
I
IV
-B
I
X
I
C
ar
ag
a
II
X
IX
M
M
A
R
III
IV
-A
X
III
V
I
V
II
V
V
-
(93)
NCR
(17)
CAR
(77)
Fishermen posted the highest poverty incidence among the nine basic sectors
in the Philippines in 2009 at 41.4%, the same level in 2006, followed by farmers
and children at poverty incidences of 36.7% from 37.2% in 2006 and 35.1% from
32.7% in 2006, respectively.
2003
2006
Increase/
Decrease
2009
Philippines5/
Fishermen
24.9
35.0
Farmers
37.0
Children
Self-employed and
Unpaid Family
Workers4/
32.7
90%
90%
90%
Confidence
Confidence
Confidenc
Povert
Povert
200
Interval
Interval
e Interval 2003
y
y
6Upp
Low Upp Incide
Upp Incide Low
200
Lower
er 2006
er
er
nce
er
nce
er
9
Limit
Lim
Limit Limit
Limit
Limit
it
24.1 25.8
26.4
25.5
27.3
26.5
25.6 27.3 1.5
0.1
32.4 37.6
41.4
38.6
44.2
41.4
38.9 43.9 6.4
0.0
(0.5
35.5 38.4
37.2
35.7
38.7
36.7
35.4 38.1 0.2
)
31.5 33.9
34.8
33.6
36
35.1
34.1 36.2 2.1
0.3
28.0
26.8
29.3
29.4
28.2
30.7
29.0
27.9 30.2
1.4
(0.4
)
Women
24.0
23
25
25.1
24.1
26.1
25.1
24.3
1.1
0.0
Youth
Migrant and Formal
Sector
19.0
18.1
19.9
20.8
19.9
21.7
21.8
20.9 22.6
1.8
1.0
14.6
13.8
15.4
15.7
14.9
16.5
16.7
17.4
1.1
1.0
Senior Citizens
15.1
14.2
15.9
16.2
15.3
17.2
15.8
15.1 16.5
1.2
(0.5
)
11.1
10.3
11.9
12.5
NATIONAL
STATISTICAL
BOARD0.3
11.7
13.3
12.8 COORDINATION
12.0 13.5 1.4
Sector
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
Individuals residing in
75 JOEncarnacion/
urban areas 26 July 2012
Poverty
Incidence
16
26
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL
10 of 17 regions had decreasing subsistence incidence between
2006 and 2009, only 5 regions between 2003 and 2006!
Region
PHILIPPINES
76
Subsistence incidence among families
2003
2006
2009
8.2
8.7
7.9
Region VII
ARMM
Region V
Region I
Region XI
CAR
Region X
Region IV-A
16.0
7.3
18.0
5.8
12.3
5.8
16.1
2.4
17.1
11.6
15.7
7.1
12.1
8.3
16.3
2.8
13.2
8.5
12.9
5.5
11.0
7.6
15.6
2.4
NCR
Region II
Region VI
Region III
Region XII
Region IX
Region VIII
2012 MCPI Annual
Conference
Caraga
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
Region IV-B
0.3
4.1
9.1
2.3
10.6
25.1
11.1
16.6
11.1
0.7
4.3
7.9
3.7
10.8
17.9
13.5
16.9
2.8
Increase/Decrease
03-06
06-09
0.4
1.1
4.3
(2.2)
1.2
(0.2)
2.5
0.2
0.3
(0.8)
(3.8)
(3.1)
(2.9)
(1.6)
(1.1)
(0.7)
(0.6)
(0.3)
0.4
0.3
(0.3)
4.1
0.3
(0.2)
7.9
(1.1)
0.9
3.7
1.4
1.0
11.3
0.2
1.7
18.6
(7.1)
1.7
14.4
2.4
2.1
19.7STATISTICAL
0.3 COORDINATION
2.4 BOARD
NATIONAL
10.5
(8.3)
3.0
II. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL
8 of 17 regions had decreasing poverty incidence between
2006 and 2009, only 5 regions between 2003 and 2006!
Region
77
Poverty incidence among families
2003
2006
2009
PHILIPPINES
20.0
21.1
Region IV-B
Region VII
Region I
CAR
Region II
NCR
Region XI
Region V
29.8
32.1
17.8
16.1
15.2
2.1
25.4
38.0
34.3
33.5
20.4
18.6
15.5
3.4
26.2
36.1
9.4
32.4
9.2
27.2
25.0
23.5
30.2
40.5
37.6
12.0
32.7
9.4
27.1
36.5
22.1
31.1
34.2
36.9
Region III
Region X
Region IV-A
Region XII
ARMM
Region VI
Region VIII
2012 MCPI Annual
Conference
Region
IX
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
Caraga
Increase/Decrease
03-06
06-09
20.9
27.6
30.2
17.8
17.1
14.5
2.6
25.6
36.0
4.5
1.4
2.6
2.4
0.3
1.3
0.9
(1.9)
(6.7)
(3.2)
(2.6)
(1.5)
(1.1)
(0.8)
(0.6)
(0.1)
12.0
2.6
0.1
32.8
0.2
0.2
10.3
0.1
0.9
28.1
(0.1)
1.0
38.1
11.4
1.7
23.8
(1.4)
1.7
33.2
1.0
2.1
36.6 STATISTICAL
(6.3)COORDINATION
2.4 BOARD
NATIONAL
39.8
(0.7)
3.0
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL: Magnitude of Food Poor Families
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL:
Magnitude
Food
Families
Biggest
reductions in the number of food
poor familiesof
from
2006 Poor
to 2009
were observed in
Regions VII, V and IV-B. On the other hand, largest increases were observed in Caraga, Regions
VIII 250,000
and XII with 17,582, 14,476 and 9,783 increase in food poor families, respectively.
-39,043
2003
2006
2009
200,000
-21,409
150,000
14,476
17,582 9,783
100,000
-19,541
50,000
78
CCT
34
XI
Caraga
XII
46
49
23
14
52
16
(143)
(72)
(133)
(49)
(73)
(50)
III
IV-B
35
27
(130)
(73)
NATIONAL
IV-A
I
ARMM
R
N
C
R
C
A
io
n
io
n
VI
IX
io
n
X
io
n
io
n
V
VI
II
VI
XI
C
ar
ag
R
a
eg
io
n
XI
R
I
eg
io
n
R
III
eg
io
n
IV
R
-B
eg
io
n
IV
-A
R
eg
io
n
I
A
R
M
M
R
eg
io
n
II
39
IX
R
eg
17
2012 MCPI Annual
Conference
(93)
(08-09) (132) (114)
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
VIII
R
eg
X
R
eg
V
R
eg
VII
R
eg
io
n
R
eg
R
eg
io
n
VI
I
-
II
CAR
7
19
19
5
28
(142)
(125)COORDINATION
(118)
(93) BOARD
(77)
STATISTICAL
NCR
8
(17)
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL: Magnitude of Poor Families
Biggest reductions in the number of poor families from 2006 to 2009 were observed in Regions IVB, VII and NCR. On the other hand, largest increases were observed in Regions VI, IV-A and VIII,
with 42,867, 37,349 and 33,808 increase in poor families, respectively.
500,000
-17,567
2003
450,000
2006
2009
400,000
42,867
350,000
33,808
300,000
37,349
250,000
-24,229
200,000
150,000
-16,423
100,000
50,000
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
CCT
17
39
23
79 JOEncarnacion/
26
July
2012
(132)
(114)
(133)
(08-09)
R
R
46
34
7
35
49
14
16 NATIONAL
19
52
19
27
5 BOARD
8
STATISTICAL
COORDINATION
28
(143)
(93)
(142)
(130)
(72)
(49)
(50)
(77)
(73)
I
(125)
N
C
M
X
III
V
X
A
R
(118)
Caraga
IV-B
(73)
II
(93)
C
A
XII
II
XI
I
IX
ARMM
IV
-B
M
C
ar
ag
a
III
II
IV-A
I
X
IX
VIII
I
III
VI
IV
-A
V
X
VII
V
V
II
V
-
NCR
(17)
CAR
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL: Magnitude of Food Poor Population
Biggest reductions in the number of food poor population from 2006 to 2009 were observed in
Regions
1,400,000VII, V and IV-B.
-184,231
2003
2006
1,200,000
-159,599
2009
1,000,000
45,176
800,000
123,931
61,626
-123,381
600,000
400,000
200,000
VIII
Caraga
XII
46
23
49
14
52
16
(143)
(133)
(72)
(49)
(73)
(50)
III
IV-A
IV-B
I
ARMM
II
R
N
C
R
C
A
XI
C
ar
ag
R
a
eg
io
n
XI
R
eg I
io
n
R
eg
III
io
n
IV
R
-A
eg
io
n
IV
-B
R
eg
io
n
I
A
R
M
M
R
eg
io
n
II
io
n
IX
XI
R
eg
IX
io
n
VI
VI
R
eg
io
n
VI
II
X
io
n
io
n
V
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
CCT
17
39
34
80 JOEncarnacion/
July 2012
(93)
(08-09) (132) 26(114)
R
eg
io
n
X
R
eg
V
R
eg
VII
R
eg
R
eg
io
n
VI
I
-
CAR
35NATIONAL
7
27
19COORDINATION
19
5 BOARD
28
STATISTICAL
(130)
(142)
(73)
(125)
(118)
(93)
(77)
NCR
8
(17)
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL: Magnitude of Poor Families
Negros Oriental, Tawi-Tawi and Pangasinan had the biggest reduction among poor
families from 2006 to 2009!
140,000
-13,996
120,000
2003
-21,199
2006
2009
100,000
80,000
60,000
-14,978
40,000
20,000
Pangasinan
81
CCT
(08-09)
7
2012
MCPI
Annual Conference
(48)
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July
2012
Negros
Oriental
Misamis
Oriental
Palawan
Oriental
Mindoro
10
4
14
6
(25)
(25)
(23)
(15)
Antique
Occidental
Mindoro
2nd District
i
Ta
w
i -t
aw
ba
le
s
Za
m
Di
st
ric
2n
d
M
t
in
do
ro
nt
iq
ue
O
cc
id
en
ta
l
lM
nt
a
O
rie
M
A
in
do
ro
la
w
an
Pa
nt
al
is
a
m
is
O
rie
O
rie
eg
ro
s
N
Pa
ng
as
in
an
nt
al
-
Zambales
Tawi-Tawi
5
9
2
2
1
NATIONAL
STATISTICAL
COORDINATION
BOARD
(18)
(11)
(5)
(13)
(11)
III. The 2009 Official Poverty Statistics
B. REGIONAL/PROVINCIAL: Magnitude of Poor Population
Sulu, Lanao del Sur, and Iloilo were the provinces that have largest increases in the
number of poor families from 2006-2009!
160,000
140,000
2003
2006
120,000
2009
19,972
100,000
80,000
24,945
18,957
60,000
40,000
20,000
R
de
l
Pa
m
pa
ng
a
iz
a
l
r
Su
l
La
na
o
is
a
m
is
La
na
o
O
cc
id
en
ta
N
de
l
C
h
So
ut
M
Negros
Occidental
82
Su
lu
or
te
o
ot
a
ba
t
Il o
il o
Ec
ue
va
N
N
eg
ro
s
O
cc
id
en
ta
l
ij a
-
CCT
(08-09)
8
2012
MCPI
Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July
2012
(31)
Nueva
Ecija
Iloilo
South
Cotabato
Lanao del
Norte
11
3
2
15
(32)
(43)
(11)
(22)
Sulu
Misamis
Occidental
Lanao del
Sur
Rizal
Pampanga
6
4
4
0
2
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
(19)
(17)
(40)
(14)
(21)
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
A. Poverty and Unemployment/Underemployment: Need for quality
employment
Proportion of poor families declined from 21.1 in 2006 to 20.9 in 2009, consistent
with the declining trend in underemployment rate and unemployment rate, which
went down from 22.6 to 19.1 and 8.0 to 7.5, respectively from 2006 to 2009!
25
22.6
-0.2
20
20.9
21.1
21.03
19.3
18.7
19.1
Unemplo yment Rate
15
Underemplo yment Rate
P o verty Incidence amo ng
families
10
8.0
5
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.3
2008
2009
2010
0
83
2006
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
2007
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
A. Poverty and Unemployment/Underemployment: Need for quality
employment
• Poverty incidence has been consistently higher among families
whose household head is employed.
•Employment is not sufficient, quality of employment matters!
Poverty Incidence Among Families by Employment Status of the
Household Head: 2003 and 2006
Employment Status
Employed
Unemployed
Not in the Labor Force
2003
2006a
21.8
24.2
15.0
17.8
8.3
11.7
a/ The
2006 poverty estimates on unemployment is based on the new official
definition of unemployment, which was approved through NSCB Resolution No. 15
Series of 2004.
Source: Special computations made by the NSCB Technical Staff using the official poverty statistics of the NSCB and the result of the
Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of the National Statistics Office (NSO).
Note: Poverty estimates were only generated for 2003 and 2006 as the 2009 FIES datafile provided by the NSO to the NSCB contains
very limited variables (i.e., 13 variables).
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
84 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
Share of EDUCATION expenditure to the total basic expenditure:
Among poor families, share very slightly decreased between 2003 and 2006:
•MDG 2 on education has low probability of achieving the target!
•Are the poor not prioritizing/spending on/gaining education since:
1) education-related expenditures are too expensive for the poor;
2) poor families need children to work and do not send them to school?
• Will the CCT make a difference?
% Share to total basic expenditure
Education expenditure of the poor, nonpoor and all families, 2003 and
2006
2012 MCPI
4.9
5
5.4
5.0
4.7
2006
Inflation for
education
2003-2006:
22.3%
4
3
2003
1.9 1.8
Inflation for
all items
2003-2006:
2
1
(0.1)
0.5
0.3
Poor
Nonpoor
All
21.2%
0
Source: Special computations made by the NSCB Technical Staff using the official poverty statistics of the NSCB and the result of the
Family
Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of the National Statistics Office (NSO).
Annual
Conference
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
85 JOEncarnacion/Note:
Poverty
estimates were only generated for 2003 and 2006 as the 2009 FIES datafile provided by the NSO to the NSCB contains very
26 July
2012
limited variables (i.e., 13 variables).
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications: Poverty & Education
Poverty Incidence and Primary Cohort Survival Rate
•In general, provinces in the least poor cluster have higher primary cohort survival rates than
provinces in the bottom poor cluster!
•Despite being in the bottom poor cluster, six provinces registered primary cohort survival rates
greater than 65%: Lanao del Norte, Eastern Samar, Surigao del Norte, Masbate, Camarines Sur, and
Agusan del Sur!
Least Poor Cluster, 2009
Province
Bottom Poor Cluster, 2009
Poverty
Incidence
Cohort Survival
Rate
Bulacan
4.8
93.0
Pampanga
6.7
1st District, NCR
Poverty
Incidence
Cohort Survival
Rate
Lanao del Norte
39.0
76.7
88.3
Eastern Samar
45.8
68.8
3.8
86.3
Surigao Del Norte
47.9
67.0
Laguna
5.9
86.1
Masbate
42.5
66.3
Bataan
7.4
79.2
Camarines Sur
38.7
66.2
2nd District, NCR
2.4
74.3
Agusan del Sur
51.2
66.0
Nueva Vizcaya
6.7
73.4
Northern Samar
41.7
59.2
Cavite
4.5
72.6
Sulu
39.3
59.1
Benguet
4.0
71.4
52.9
57.6
Rizal
6.5
70.8
Zamboanga del
Norte
Ilocos Norte
9.2
67.6
Maguindanao
44.6
57.5
3rd District, NCR
3.8
60.8
Bohol
41.0
55.8
4th District, NCR
1.6
60.5
Romblon
43.0
53.6
Batanes
0.0
58.6
Saranggani
40.7
53.1
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
86 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
Province
Zamboanga
Sibugay
47.9
NATIONAL
STATISTICAL43.2
COORDINATION BOARD
Davao Oriental
42.5
30.3
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications: Poverty & Education
Poverty Incidence and Primary Completion Rate
•In general, provinces in the least poor cluster have higher primary completion rates than provinces in
the bottom poor cluster!
•Despite being in the bottom poor cluster, five provinces registered primary completion rates greater
than 65%: Lanao del Norte, Eastern Samar, Camarines Sur, Surigao del Norte, and Masbate!
Least Poor Cluster, 2009
Province
87
Bottom Poor Cluster, 2009
Poverty
Incidence
Completion Rate
Bulacan
4.8
93.0
Pampanga
6.7
Laguna
Poverty
Incidence
Completion Rate
Lanao del Norte
39.0
74.3
88.5
Eastern Samar
45.8
68.7
5.9
87.6
Camarines Sur
38.7
66.3
1st District, NCR
3.8
85.9
Surigao Del Norte
47.9
65.8
Bataan
7.4
78.5
Masbate
42.5
65.7
2nd District, NCR
2.4
73.8
Agusan del Sur
51.2
64.8
Nueva Vizcaya
6.7
72.8
Northern Samar
41.7
58.4
Cavite
4.5
72.3
Zamboanga del Norte
52.9
57.2
Benguet
4.0
71.1
Sulu
39.3
57.2
Rizal
6.5
70.5
Maguindanao
44.6
56.2
Ilocos Norte
9.2
67.0
Bohol
41.0
54.7
3rd District, NCR
3.8
60.0
Saranggani
40.7
52.1
4th District, NCR
1.6
59.8
Zamboanga Sibugay
43.2
46.1
Batanes
0.0
58.5
Romblon
43.0
46.0
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
Davao Oriental
42.5
29.4
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
Province
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications: Poverty & Prices
Share of HOUSING expenditure to the total basic expenditure:
2003 vs. 2006:
Poor vs. nonpoor:
•In general, the share went down from
2003 to 2006 among poor and non-poor
families.
Poor families spend relatively less
on housing than the nonpoor but
overall inflation is higher than for
housing
% Share to total basic expenditure
Housing expenditure of the poor, nonpoor and all families,
2003 and 2006
19.3 18.9
20
18.5 18.2
2003
2006
15
10.6
Inflation for
housing
2003-2006:
12.7%
10.4
10
5
(0.2)
(0.4)
Poor
Nonpoor
(0.3)
0
Inflation for
all items
2003-2006:
21.2%
All
Source: Special computations made by the NSCB Technical Staff using the official poverty statistics of the NSCB and the result of the Family
Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of the National Statistics Office (NSO).
88
Note:
Poverty estimates were only generated for 2003 and 2006 as the 2009 FIES datafile provided by the NSO to the NSCB contains very
2012 MCPI Annual
Conference
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
limited variables (i.e., 13 variables).
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
III. Some Policy/Program Implications
Share of HOUSING expenditure to the total basic expenditure:
% Share to total basic expenditure
2003 vs. 2006:
Poor vs. nonpoor:
Between 2003 and 2006, inflation for food is
•In general, the
sharethan
went
down
from
Poor families spend relatively less
higher
for
all items/housing:
2003 to 2006 among poor and non-poor
on housing than nonpoor families
•Housing < All Items < Food
families.
•The Poor
suffered more from the increase in
Housing expenditure of the poor, nonpoor and all families,
prices
2003 and 2006
19.3 18.9
20
18.5 18.2
2003
2006
15
10.6
2003 – 2006
inflation for:
10.4
10
All items:21.2%
Housing: 12.7%
5
Food: 21.4%
(0.2)
(0.4)
Poor
Nonpoor
(0.3)
0
All
Source: Special computations made by the NSCB Technical Staff using the official poverty statistics of the NSCB and the result of the Family
Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of the National Statistics Office (NSO).
89
Note:
Poverty estimates were only generated for 2003 and 2006 as the 2009 FIES datafile provided by the NSO to the NSCB contains very
2012 MCPI Annual
Conference
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
limited variables (i.e., 13 variables).
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
G. Poverty and the CCT: CCT support is not enough!
Family Size
Monthly Income Shortfall
(Based on Income Gap)
Monthly CCT Contribution
1
361
2
721
3*
1,082
800
4*
1,443
1,100
5*
1,803
1,400
Note: 1) 4Ps provides conditional cash grants to beneficiaries with:
a)
PhP 500.00/month per household for health and nutrition expenses
b)
PhP 300/month per child for educational expenses
2) Assume that all cash grant beneficiaries complied in the given conditions
a) Pregnant women must avail of pre- and post-natal care and be attended during
childbirth by a trained health professional:
b) Parents must attend family development sessions;
c) 0-5 year old children must receive regular preventive health check-ups and
vaccines and 6-14 yr. Old children must receive deworming pills twice a year;
90
d) 3-14 yr old children must attend
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July
2012
classes
at least 85% of the time
day acre or pre-school/elementary/highschool
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications - Poverty and the
MDGs
Among the regions, 4 regions have high probability, 6 have medium and 7
regions have low probability of achieving the target by 2015. Starting 2010,
ARMM needs to reduce poverty incidence among population annually by 5.86
percentage points to achieve the MDG target by 2015!
Region
91
Target poverty
incidence among
population by 2015
1991
Baseline
NCR
3.8
7.6
0.03
CAR
18.7
37.3
0.71
Region I
17.3
34.6
1.0
Region II
15.3
30.6
0.58
Region III
10.9
21.8
0.73
Region IV-A
12.4
24.8
0.25
Region IV-B
21.9
43.8
2.19
Region V
27.3
54.6
2.97
Region VI
21.1
42.1
1.69
Region VII
21.2
42.4
2.39
Region VIII
22.6
45.1
3.14
Region IX
17.9
35.8
4.20
Region X
22.6
45.3
2.83
Region XI
19.7
39.3
1.94
Region XII
25.2
50.4
1.75
ARMM
10.7
21.5
5.86
22.5
45.0
Caraga
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
JOEncarnacion/Source:
26 July
2012 Statistical Coordination Board
National
2003
2006
2009
Target annual percentage
point decrease between
2010-2015
4.22
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
SOME THREATS:
The poor are vulnerable to:
1.
Price increases of:
•
Food
•
Oil
2.
Effect of earthquake/tsunami in Japan
3.
La Niña phenomenon
4.
Threat to earthquake/other natural calamities/climate change in
the Philippines with the poor at a greater risk to:
•
Landslide
•
One meter rise in sea level
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
92 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
Challenges
OFWs who may have to come back (e.g., from the Middle East, Japan,
or from other destinations)
•
Must build the necessary social and economic infrastructure to
accommodate and absorb them back in our society.
•
Includes creating local jobs, providing the needed social services
and tapping emerging markets like China and India.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
93 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. Some Policy/Program Implications
•While CPI for all items increased only by 7.0% between 2009 and 2011,
prices of
FUEL increased by 25.2%!
•During the same period, prices of transportation and communication
increased by 11.5%!
These are captured in the CPI for all items but their share to CPI (based on consumption
from the FIES) are only 2.4% for fuel and 7.5% for transportation!
Commodity Group
2009
CPI
2010
20111/
Inc/Dec
09-10 10-11 09-11
CPI
weights
All Items
160.0 166.1 171.2
3.8
3.1
7.0
100.0
Food
Rice
162.4
171.6
3.1
1.1
3.3
1.0
6.5
2.2
46.6
9.4
Fuel (Oil)
211.5 239.7 264.7
13.3
10.5
25.2
2.4
5.3
5.8
11.5
7.5
Transportation
(and
184.5
167.4
173.5
194.4
173.0
175.3
205.6
Communication)
Note: 1/ CPI 2011 - January to March only
Source: National Statistics Office
•QUESTION IS DID INCOME INCREASE FAST ENOUGH TO COPE
WITH THE INCREASES OF PRICES BETWEEN 2009-2011?
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
94 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
AMONG MINIMUM WAGE EARNERS
While prices of fuel and transportation increased by 25.2% and 11.5%, respectively, between
2009 and 2010, incomes of minimum wage earners did not increase as fast!
Highest income increase observed during this period is in Region XI with only 7.9%.
On the other hand, incomes of minimum wage earners in Region VIII did not increase at all
between the two-year period!
Region
NCR
CAR
Region I
Region II
Region III
Region IV-A
Region IV-B
Region V
Region VI
Region VII
Minimum Wage (Non-Agriculture)
2009
2010
2011
382
404
404
260
260
272
240
240
248
235
235
245
302
302
316
320
320
337
252
264
264
239
247
247
250
265
265
267
285
285
Region VIII
09-10
5.8
0
0
0
0
0
4.8
3.3
6.0
6.7
Inc/Dec
10-11
0
4.6
3.3
4.3
4.6
5.3
0
0
0
0
09-11
5.8
4.6
3.3
4.3
4.6
5.3
4.8
3.3
6.0
6.7
238
238
238
0.0
0
0.0
Region IX
Region X
240
256
255
269
255
269
6.3
5.1
0
0
6.3
5.1
Region XI
265
286
286
7.9
0
7.9
245
233
210
255
243
222
255
243
222
4.1
4.3
5.7
0
0
0
4.1
4.3
5.7
Region XII
Caraga
2012 MCPI AnnualARMM
Conference
95 JOEncarnacion/ 26Source:
NWPC website
July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
III. Some Policy/Program Implications
AMONG GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Period
Event
July 2009
Increase in the salaries of government employees with
the implementation of the 1st of four parts of the Salary
Standardization Law III (SSL III)
July 2010
2nd of four parts of SSL III; To date, same rate is still
being implemented.
Average increase between 2009-2011 = 14.6%
(Note: Due to time and data constraints, this was computed as a simple average of the 09-11
increase of all Salary Grades, Step I.)
While salaries of government employees
increased between 2009-2011, on the average, by
14.6%, we are in danger of being poor if salary
increases are not sustained/updated to cope with
the ongoing oil/food price increases!
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
96 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
Challenges
Greater collaboration between the DSWD and NSCB on the following:
•
Maximization of the wealth of information on poverty indicators from the
NHTSPR, which could be utilized by the Philippine Statistical System, to
provide a more holistic picture of the poverty situation in the country.
•
DSWD can consider the food threshold as possible reference to compute
for standard per capita costs of food requirements in DSWD (day
care/children) centers but food threshold must be recomputed for children.
(Note: As pointed out by a DSWD representative during the NSCB
presentation to the DSWD Technical Staff on the 2009 Poverty Statistics last
8 March 2011.)
•
The Cabinet Cluster on Human Development chaired by Sec. Soliman of
DSWD, in its meeting last 17 March 2011 created the Technical Working
Group on Poverty Reduction Statistics (TWG-PRS) chaired and coordinated
by the NSCB. The TWG-PRS aims to harmonize and standardize existing
statistical frameworks/indicator systems on poverty reduction, towards a
common understanding and appreciation of poverty statistics in the
country.
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
97 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
IV. Some Policy/Program Implications
TO AID THE PHILIPPINE STATISTICAL SYSTEM IN RESPONDING TO
THESE MANY DEMANDS/CHALLENGES:
4. Allow statistical offices to hire and increase number of
statistical positions in government!
Statistical agencies should be treated differently from other
government agencies!
5. Implement a true rationalization plan! (NSCB is being required
to reduce its 224 positions down to 149 but Demand for Statistics is
rising exponentially!)
NSCB should be given resources to expand its human
resource base and establish its Regional Divisions in all
regions of the country for more balanced statistical
development. (NSCB is only present in 9 out of 17 regions, despite
annual requests to DBM to be present in the other 8 regions.)
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
98 JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
H. Poverty and the Basic Sectors
Poverty Incidence among Basic Sectors: 2003 and 2006
Poorest sectors in 2003 and 2006:
Largest number of poor population in 2003 and
2006, by sector:
•Fishermen (41.4%), farmers (37.2%) and children
(34.8%) !
•Children (12.3 million), women (10.7 million),
and population living in urban areas (5.3
million)!
•All sectors posted increases in poverty
incidence between the period 2003 and 2006!
Poverty Incidence among Basic Sectors: 2003 and 2006
41.4%
Poverty Incidence
45.0
37.2%
40.0
35.0
Magnitude of Poor among Basic Sectors: 2003 and 2006
Sector
34.8%
30.0
2003
25.0
20.0
2006
Children
Women
Urban
Magnitude of Poor
2003
11,400,000
9,605,037
4,429,424
2006
Difference
2003 - 2006
12,300,000
900,000
10,700,000 1,094,963
5,310,531
881,107
Youth
4,280,197
4,850,607
570,410
15.0
Migrant and Formal Sector
2,283,773
2,599,336
315,563
10.0
5.0
Farmers
1,768,249
1,773,484
5,235
Senior Citizens
793,233
1,035,089
241,856
Fishermen
355,815
400,214
44,398
0.0
Fishermen Farmers
Children
Women
Youth
Senior
Migrant and
Citizens
Formal
Urban
Sector
Sector
Source: National Statistical Coordination Board
Note: 1. Poverty estimates were generated based on the refinements in the official poverty estimation methodology, which was approved on by the NSCB Executive Board
on 1 February
2012 MCPI
Annual2011.
Conference
STATISTICAL
COORDINATION
BOARD
2. 2009 poverty statistics
for the basic sectors will be available 2 months after the provision ofNATIONAL
the merged 2009
FIES-LFS data
file from NSO. To date,
the NSO has not
JOEncarnacion/
26 July 2012
yet provided the said data file to the NSCB.
99
Poverty Incidence among FISHERMEN by Region: 2003 and 2006
Largest magnitude of poor fishermen:
Region VII in 2003
ARMM in 2006
Highest poverty incidence:
Caraga in 2003 and 2006
Magnitude of Poor Fishermen: 2003 and 2006
Poverty Incidence among Fishermen, by Region: 2003 and 2006
Caraga:
56.0% in 2003 and
60.0 56.5% in 2006
Region
Philippines
Poverty Incidence
50.0
40.0
10.0
Region
Region III
Region II
NCR
Region IVA
Region XII
Region VI
Region IVB
Region VIII
Region I
Region X
Region XI
ARMM
Region V
Region VII
Region IX
Caraga
Philippines
0.0
2003
2006
2003 - 2006
355,815
400,214
44,398
ARMM
36,257
83,719
47,462
Region VII
49,350
51,216
1,866
Region V
41,346
42,837
1,492
2003
Region IVA
32,174
32,885
711
2006
Region VIII
26,864
29,785
2,921
Region IVB
29,491
25,220
(4,270)
Region IX
31,005
24,702
(6,303)
Region VI
22,002
23,898
1,896
C araga
19,272
17,590
(1,682)
Region I
6,726
17,099
10,374
Region X
19,171
14,103
(5,068)
Region XII
16,849
13,151
(3,697)
Region XI
12,450
11,270
(1,180)
Region III
9,836
6,697
(3,139)
NC R
1,454
3,529
2,075
Region II
1,407
2,512
1,105
30.0
20.0
Difference
Magnitude of Poor
Source: National Statistical Coordination Board
Note: 1. Poverty estimates are revised based on the refinements in the official poverty estimation methodology, which was approved on by the NSCB Executive Board
on 1 February 2011.
2. 2009 poverty statistics for the basic sectors will be available 2 months after the provision of the FIES-LFS data file from NSO. To date, the NSO has not yet
2012 MCPI Annual Conference
provided the FIES-LFS data file.
NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD
JOEncarnacion/
26 July
2012
3. Poverty incidence
estimate
for fishermen in CAR was excluded due to the very low level of precision.
100
Children, women, and individuals residing in urban areas accounted for the
largest number of poor population in the country at 12.4 million in 2009 from 12.3
million in 2006, 11.2 million in 2009 from 10.7 million in 2006 and 5.7 million in
2009 from 5.3 million in 2006, respectively.
2003
Sector
Magnitud
e of Poor
Philippines
19,796,954
Children
11,363,850
Women
2006
90% Confidence
Interval
Upper
Lower Limit
Limit
90% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Upper
Limit
Limit
21,435,613
22,964,387
Magnitude
of Poor
23,142,481
90% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Upper
Limit
Limit
22,363,307
23,836,693
2003
2006
2006 2009
2,376,
236
969,291
20,483,453
22,173,190
11,228,469
11,499,230
12,272,819
12,126,241
12,419,398
12,414,811
12,286,448
12,543,174
908,6
96
141,992
9,605,037
9,509,134
9,700,940
10,691,078
10,584,303
10,797,853
11,169,745
11,075,812
11,263,677
1,086,
041
478,667
Individuals
residing in
urban areas
4,429,424
4,394,400
4,464,448
5,310,531
5,267,025
5,354,037
5,709,170
5,664,660
5,753,680
881,1
07
398,639
Youth
4,280,197
4,242,071
4,318,323
4,850,607
4,805,832
4,895,382
5,367,308
5,323,314
5,411,302
570,4
10
516,701
Selfemployed
and Unpaid
Family
Workers
3,566,586
3,522,046
3,611,126
4,115,632
4,064,734
4,166,530
4,186,194
4,139,565
4,232,823
549,0
46
70,562
Migrant and
Formal
Sector
2,283,773
2,265,940
2,301,606
2,599,336
2,578,880
2,619,792
3,118,701
3,095,868
3,141,534
315,5
63
519,365
Farmers
1,768,249
1,742,363
1,794,135
1,773,484
1,747,354
1,799,614
1,685,148
1,662,409
1,707,887
5,235
-88,336
Senior
793,233 Conference
786,342
2012 MCPI Annual
Citizens
JOEncarnacion/ 26 July 2012
800,124
1,035,089
1,025,583
1,044,595
101
19,110,455
Magnitude
of Poor
Increase/
Decrease
2009
241,8
1,181,121
1,172,658
1,189,584
146,032
NATIONAL
STATISTICAL
COORDINATION
BOARD
56
44,39