8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
1/199
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
2/199
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
3/199
2012/2013 PhilippineHuman DevelopmentReport
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
4/199
Copyright 2013 Human Development Network (HDN)
ISSN 0118-6361
All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission of the
Human Development Network (HDN).
The views expressed in this Report are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect those of their affiliated institutions or the sponsoring agencies.
For inquiries about the Human Development Network (HDN) visit our
website at www.hdn.org.ph.
cover design Eduardo A. Davad
book design and layout Eduardo A. Davad
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
5/199
Published by the
Human Development Network (HDN)
in cooperation with the
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
2012/2013 PhilippineHuman DevelopmentReport
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
6/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 vii
Message
S
i 1990 when the frst global Human Development Report
(HDR) came out, many have embraced the HD concept, but
the dscourse perssts as the quest or HD contnues. UDPs
advocacy or human development (HD) has led to the subsequent
producton o regonal and natonal HDRs, thus enablng the
dscussons on human development to take root n country- and
regon-specfc contexts.Followng the dscplne o ts global and regonal counterparts, natonal
HDRs provde the same rgor o analyss, whch we now fnd n the Phlppne
Human Development Report (PHDR). As n prevous edtons, ths 7th Phlppne
Human Development Report (2012-2013 PHDR) oers yet another development
perspectve, Geography, crtcal to the attanment o human development or
the people o Phlppne archpelago. The road to human development s flled
wth multdmensonal barrers and challenges. To understand the path to
human development, snce 1994 the PHDRs have tackled dverse themes such as
gender, educaton, employment, peace and securty, and nsttutons. The past
PHDRs have earned ther reputaton as mportant reerences to development
leaders and practtoners o the country wth ther n-depth analyss and
concrete suggestons.
The 7th edton o the PHDR takes on the spatal dmenson o human
development. Geography s a deep determnant o human development, states
the 2012/2013 PHDR. Throughout the report, t argues that human development
takes place n physcal space that s to a large extent fxed. But socoeconomc
and human actors can nuence each other and may lead to derent human
development outcomes.
The PHDR looks nto the spatal patterns n the development o the
Phlppnes and how these aect human development. For a country o 7,107
slands wth dverse topographc and clmatc attrbutes and greatly challengedby physcal connectvty, the Report brngs to our attenton the development
varatons brought about by ths geographc nuence. The PHDR provdes
a perspectve on the geographc condtons aectng local outcomes; the
opportunty costs o not ully takng the element o dstnctveness nto account
n the pursut o human development; and the nsttutonal responses needed
to address the challenges and opportuntes o geographcal realtes wthn and
beyond admnstratve boundares.
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
7/199
viii PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
it provdes expert analyses on the unctonalty o human spaces and the
nterplay o socal and economc processes aectng the communty and the
development o ts people. The Report also provdes a reecton on regonal
development and ntegraton n empowerng or dsempowerng local people n
attanng ull human development.
As a useul reerence n development plannng, ths Report s especallydedcated to the local governments and ther leaders to assst them n revewng
polces and nterventons to maxmze ther efcency n accordance to
geographcal unqueness. For one, understandng geography and ts mpacts
on human development pathways, could unvel solutons to the ssue o rsng
nequalty and dsparty o urban and rural areas.
UDP s the key advocate o human development upholdng that people
are the real wealth o a naton. HD champons the creaton o an enablng
envronment or people to enjoy long, healthy, and creatve lves. Far greater than
the accumulaton o assets and fnancal wealth, human development should be
the core means and the ultmate goal o development eorts.
On ths note, the Human Development etwork (HD) deserves another
eather n ts cap or capturng the perspectve o geography and human
development n such an nnovatve and convncng manner. indeed, the
Phlppnes, whch has started to demonstrate hgh economc growth, but s
constantly challenged by ts geographcal dversty and deep-rooted nequalty,
wll greatly beneft rom the recommendatons o ths 7th edton o the PHDR.
Thank you and Mabuhay!
TOSHIHIRO TANAKAunDP Cry Drcr
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
8/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 ix
Message
T
H 7th Phlppne Human Development
Report wth the theme Geography and
Human Development comes at a tme when
the government s updatng the Phlppne
Development Plan (PDP), 2011-2016 wth an eye
toward payng greater attenton to the spataland sectoral dmensons o growth n the pursut o more
nclusve outcomes.
The updatng also has an eye toward an examnaton o
nsttutonal arrangements between admnstratve layers
o government n order to better algn local and natonal
development plans. Ths s crtcal short- and medum-term
gans are to take root and carry the country orward nto the
longer term.
it s auspcous thereore that the Report, n artculatng
the role o geography n nuencng the qualty and pace o
human development, has made the ollowng key ponts:
nGeography explans a sgnfcant porton o the
varatons n le expectancy, educaton, per capta ncome,
and poverty ncdence across the Phlppnes. it s a proound
determnant o human development, ntrnscally lnked to the
latter through human health, agrcultural prospects, access
between locatons, and specfc poltcal nsttutons.
nPast polcy and nsttutonal arrangements have aled
to adequately address the mplcatons o local geography and
have resulted n sgnfcant costs to human development.
nHuman development costs arse rom a natonalorganzatonal structure that arranges sectors or agences
as vertcal slos and, wthn each agency, by programs. Such
arrangement s ncompatble wth the ntegrated, ecosystem-
based governance that local geography demands.
nLarge nefcences and oregone benefts result rom
the well-ntended but msguded noton that the unorm
dsperson o producton across space wll lead to growth that
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
9/199
x PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
s more evenly spread out and thereore more equtable.
nonetheless, a geographcal convergence o lvng
standards can take place and must reman a prme objectve. in
short, spatally uneven, unbalanced growth s compatble wth
nclusve human development.
nThe challenge o geography requres the delvery o basc
and socal servces that s ntegrated and locally anchoredmostcrucally at the provncal level.
We apprecate the lessons documented n the 7th PHDR, are
challenged by them, and look orward to how they wll norm
development polces and programs and resource allocaton
prortes o both the natonal and local governments movng
orward.
ARSENIO M. BALISACANScrry f Sccc Pg
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
10/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 xi
Forewor
TH Philippine Human Development Report 2012/2013 dscusses the
crucal role o place and space n human development. The crux o
the ssue s suggested n the epgraph rom Rzal: some are ortunate
enough to be helped and made happy by ther place o stayndeed,
they may even have the luxury o choosng t. Others, on the other
hand, are smply condemned by ther crcumstances to endure t.
Part i o the Report demonstrates how the Phlppnes dverse, ragmented, and
hazard-prone geography poses huge challenges to human development. Dstance,
land orm, clmate, and natural hazards are sgnfcant obstacles to peoples access
to health, to educaton, and ther ablty to obtan a sustanable and productve lvng.
Besdes natural actors, economc growth tsel s a process that by ts nature creates
geographc unevenness and nequalty, even whle exstng socal and poltcal
barrers can rustrate peoples eorts to better ther own lot.
The human development vew o geographcal derences s straghtorward:
derences n locaton shouldnottranslate nto derences n human opportuntes.
Ths mples, frst and oremost, that the undamental means needed to buld
human capabltes must be made avalable rrespectve o locaton. Access to
basc educaton and to prmary health, n partcular, should be spatally blnd.
Second, recognzng that economc growth and wealth-creaton are not unormly
spread but nevtably create basns o attracton, e.g., ctes and mass markets,
aordng access to ncomes and lvelhood opportuntes must ental spatally
connectve or market-ntegratng nrastructure that acltates the bdrectonal
movement o goods and people.
in the lmt, human development presupposes peoples reedom to leave
areas o low opportunty n pursut o better prospects. What matters s that such
decsons are taken not out o desperaton or under duress but as ree choces rom
among a set o humane alternatves. ven as the Report recognzes the geographc
unevenness entaled by growthand thereore the nevtablty o leadng and
laggng areast ponts to the possblty o reconclng ths wth equal human
opportuntes: Uneven, unbalanced growth s not ncompatble wth nclusve
human development.
Measured aganst these, the spatal dmensons o current publc polcy
are unortunately wantng and unresponsve. The bas or centralzaton nmany government programs leads to a one-sze-fts-all approach that als to
account or local condtons aectng the populaton. Dsease-specfc natonal
health campagns pass over neglected tropcal dseases that are rampant n
some localtes. Agrcultural programs ocus on specfc crops rather than on
armers whose actvtes are vared and actually span several crops. Reorms and
regulaton o transport and access are undertaken pece-meal, accordng to the
specfc mode o transport, rather than beng normed by the larger pcture o
travel across varous modes o transport.
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
11/199
xii PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
What prevals n all these s an emphass on objects and categoressomepartcular dsease, specal crop, or avored transport moderather than on actual
people and the places they nhabt. Ths unresponsve ramework s renorced
by a slo-complex n many natonal agences themselves, whch splts
responsbltes among non-overlappng (and thereore non-cooperatng)
bureaucraces organzed along the same technocratc lnes o categores rather
than people. Fnally, the combned alure o natonal vson and denal o local
responsblty leads to the dsspaton o resources that s the dvde-by-N
syndromethe dsspaton o publc resources n duplcatve nrastructure
and programs n dsregard o scale, synergy, and the conscous ntegraton o
larger markets.
The Report nstead advocates gvng provnces the greatest leeway to defne
ther own prortes and provdng the resources to acheve them. ot all otodays provnces represent optmal dvsons rom the vewpont o geography
and ecosystems (especally snce sheer poltcal consderatons have nuenced
recent provnce-creaton, partcularly n Mndanao). But provnces are currently
stll the most practcable level o poltcal authorty that can gve ull weght to
the specfcty and dversty o local condtons, even as t s capable o adoptng
a vewpont comprehensve enough to adopt programs that explot potental
economes o scale and scope. it s provnces and provncal leadershp that
can potentally respond to the derng needs o leadng and laggng areas,
e.g., between urban areas and perpheresas well as provde the connectons
needed to oster healthy symbotc relatons between them.
urrent laws and plannng and budgetng practces, however, paradoxcally
constran provncal governments rom perormng ths ntegratve uncton.Rather than expand the role o plannng among provnces, current laws nstead
reduce ther jursdctons by rppng out the most developed urban areas; tax
bases and tax powers are crcumscrbed; provncal spendng responsbltes
are overextended yet sorely underunded; n the meantme parochal poltcal
pressure s accommodated or even greater subdvson o jursdctons. The
Report argues that serous geographcal obstacles to human development can never
be adequately addressed wthout gvng ull ren to provnce-level plannng and
fscal responsbltywth the democratc accountablty that entals. To ths end,
uture legslaton s clearly needed to change the current cty-centrc emphass o
devoluton and redefne the powers o local governments accordngly. The Report s
beng ssued at what the Human Development etwork beleves s an opportune
moment, when there s ncreasng nterest n revstng the Local Governmentode (1991) ater more than two decades o mplementaton. ven wthout
legslaton, however, a good deal can already be accomplshed by expandng the
role o provnces and provnce-level concerns n the desgn o programs and the
choce o projects by natonal-level plannng, fscal, and lne agences.
Part ii o the Report analyzes the record o provncal progress n human
development over the longer perod 1997-2009.
Whle a slow but steady mprovement s evdent n ndcators o human
development or the country as a whole, ths masks the hghly varable perormance
among provnces throughout the perod. Global economc crses, such as those
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
12/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 xiii
whch enguled the country n 1997-2008 and 2008-2009 are crucal actorsexplanng the larger trend, although the record also llustrates how mprovements
n non-ncome measures o human development can occur notwthstandng
conjunctural varatons n ncome. More mportant, however, s the sometmes
volatle uctuatons n the human development ndcators n some provnces.
specally worrsome are the prospects or provnces that have some o the
lowest HDis to begn wth, but whch n addton are locked n the vcous crcle o
allng ncomes and allng health and educaton outcomes (Agusan del Sur, Lanao
del Sur, Magundanao, Sulu, Taw-Taw, and Zamboanga Sbugay).
The long vew also reveals rses and alls n the achevements o even
erstwhle hgh-achevers n human development. The reasons or ths can be
vared, but a possble reason llustrates a pont made n the theme chapter:
moblty and mgraton can change the composton o a localtys populatonn many ways. Wthout oresght and adequate preparaton, n-mgraton nto a
hghly developed area can ultmately create problems n health, educaton, and
even ncomes e.g., through congeston, polluton, and the emergence o slums. On
the other hand, outmgraton o the sklled, educated, and youthul wll certanly
erode the record o the areas they leave behnd.
What s clear s that the depth, varety, and mplcatons o such local
experences can be adequately understood and addressed only by the poltcal
authortes and communtes drectly concerned. indeed the collaton and
computaton o a subnatonal seres o the Human Development index (HDi)
and other ndcators underscores the contnung advocacy o the Human
Development etwork (HD) to lnk achevements n human development
wth geographcal poltcal responsblty. Ths returns to the theme chaptersmessage, thereore: under current arrangements, there s no eectve poltcal
authorty or responsblty or montorng and understandng the record o
human development at a comprehensve geographc scale, namely at the level o
a provnce wth all ts ctes and arms, all ts leadng and laggng areas, ts entre
populaton engaged n all types o economc actvtes, and ts entre health and
educaton delvery system.
Ths Report, thereore, s addressed to poltcal leaders at all levels but
especally to the people to whom the ormer are responsble and must be held
to account. By ssung ths volume, the Human Development etwork hopes
both leaders and people wll recognze the challenge geography poses to human
developmentso that they wll change the nsttutons that stand n the way o
an eectve response.
EMMANuEL S. dE dIOSPrsd
h Dp nwrk
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
13/199
xiv PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
Acknowlegments
THiS Report represents two and a hal years worth o work, a act reectng the
nature o the topc, the most complex and multaceted addressed by the Human
Development etwork (HD) so ar.
The process ncluded two ncepton workshops n January and March 2011; a
seres o publc orums to revew an orgnal set o background papers n August 2011;
and urther workshops n October 2011 and March 2012, beore a derent approach
was adopted n July 2012.
At the same tme, the atonal Statstcal oordnaton Board (SB) and HD studed the updatedglobal methodology or the Human Development index (HDi) and dscussed ts applcablty to the
Phlppnes. An nterm methodology or ths volume was agreed upon and presented to the SB
xecutve Board n February 2012. omputatons were subjected to a rgorous process o replcaton
beore the 2009 HDis or provnces were dssemnated n a jont SB-HD Forum on 10 December
2012. The statstcal annex ncluded n ths volume presents back-computatons o the HDi to 1997
usng the updated methodology or comparablty.
The HD xecutve ommttee expresses ts sncere thanks to all the ndvduals who collaborated
at varous stages o the process, as partcpants, dscussants, revewers, wrters, research assocates,
and sta assstants. Specal thanks or ther tme, patence, and commtment s extended to the
ollowng:
The frst set o contrbutors o background papers: Art orpuz, Je Ducanes, Jude sguerra, kkn
Beronlla, Agnes spnas, Jeanne illo, Leonardo Lanzona, Maranto Luspo (and assocates rom the
Holy ame Unversty n Bohol), Dorace Zoleta-antes, ory az, Temaro Rvera, dgardo Tongson,
Randy Tuao, Joey Sescon, and the Manla Observatory;
The second set o contrbutors: Henry Baslo, Vcente Belzaro, Red onstantno, Jame Faustno,
ino Manalo, Denns Mapa and assocates, lseo Ponce, apt. Ben Sols, and Lory Tan;
olleagues who provded nsghts and comments durng varous workshops, notably athanel
Bantayan, Dpayan Bhattacharyya, colo del astllo, Mars Dokno, Steeve Godlano, Jed Gomez, Gl
Jacnto, Mahar Lagmay, Mary Racels, Agnes Rola, and Dan Slvestre;
Members o the HDi Techncal Workng Group: now-current SB Secretary General Jose Ramon
Albert, ela Reyes (Phlppne insttute or Development Studes), Dr. Jessamyn ncarnacon (SB),Bernadette Balamban(SB), Je Ducanes (HD), Toby Monsod (HD), Anna Jean asanas (SB),
Mercy astro (Deped), Vkk arr delos Reyes (DOH), Marjore Vllaver (SO);
Sharon Pza, who replcated the frst set o HDi computatons and eventually fnalzed the 1997-
2009 seres, buldng on ntal work by Stella Lbre, Joseph Joven, G Andal, and Je Ducanes, wth
assstance rom Fath Balsacan and Regna Baroma;
Marna Durano (UPS), who wrote Part ii o ths report, Human Development n Phlppne
Provnces 1997-2009;
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
14/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 xv
Toby Monsod (UPS) who wrote Part i o ths report, the theme essay, Geography and
Human Development, wth helpul contrbutons rom mmanuel S. de Dos (UPS);
Sharon Fangonon who served as ofce supervsor apart rom provdng excellent research
and producton assstance to the man authors, ncludng generatng some o the maps;
Thanks and acknowledgements are also due to the ollowng: the ofcers and sta o
the Department o Agrculture, Department o Health, the World Health Organzaton, the
Department o Transportaton and ommuncatons, and the vl Avaton Authorty o the
Phlppnes, who generously accommodated requests or normaton; Maro Feranl and thePiDS who provded fnancal management and accountng support; the SB Team led by Dr.
Jessamyn ncarnacon who organzed the well-attended dssemnaton event last December
and agan the launch o ths volume; the Phlppne enter or conomc Development, whch
provded addtonal acltes and research support; and the Unted atons Development
Program, thru Toshhro Tanaka and orazon Urquco, whch agan provded unqualfed
support and understandng to the HD notwthstandng the delays whch plagued ths round
o producton.
Specal thanks go to Yvonne hua (press edtor), Avgal Olarte (prooreader) and d Davad
(layout artst), who whpped the volume nto publcaton-ready orm under an extremely tght
schedule.
Fnally the HD xecutve ommttee wshes to express ts specal thanks and apprecaton
to Toby Monsod, the general edtor o ths volume, who asde rom takng on the dauntng
ntellectual task o wrtng the theme essay, also trelessly organzed the logstcal, personnel,
and fnancal requrements o producng ths Report up to ts publcaton. Ths Report would
have been mpossble wthout her eorts and dedcaton.
HdN Exective Committee (2012-2014)
e S. d Ds, Prsd
m. Cy Rs Bz-Bs, vc-PrsdFrd t. adb, Scrry
Wfrd m. v, trsrr
erd m. Cps, adr
S Cs-msd (Fdg Prsd)
G t. Cs
Kr Cs-Dd
mc l. t
R t. vr
ars m. Bsc
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
15/199
xvi PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
ls f mps ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................x
ls f tbs .......................................................................................................................................................................................................x
ls f Fgrs ....................................................................................................................................................................................................x
ls f Bxs .........................................................................................................................................................................................................xx
ls f Bx tbs ...............................................................................................................................................................................................xx
ls f Bx Fgrs ..............................................................................................................................................................................................xx
abbrs ......................................................................................................................................................................................................xx
I: Geography and human development in the Philippines ................................................ 1
Maps ............................................................................................................................................50
II: Human development in Philippine provinces: 1997-2009 ..........................................59
Bibliography ...............................................................................................................................93
Technical notes ........................................................................................................................101
Statistical annexes ..................................................................................................................109
Maps
1 lc sp dpdc h Dp idx (2009) ...................................................................................51
2 lc sp dpdc pr cp c (2009) ........................................................................................................51
3 Sp dpdc c grw (1988-2009)............................................................................................................51
4 lc sp dpdc c grw (1988-2009) ................................................................................................51
5 mr css (2009) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 52
6 Scssss srfc (2005) .......................................................................................................................................52
7 mcrfr dc prcs (2009) ....................................................................................................................................... 52
8 C prc f Sth g cdr 12-71 s (2004) ....................................................................... 52
9 Pry d dss (2009) ............................................................................................................................................................ 5310 C yps ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 54
11 agr-cgc zs ....................................................................................................................................................................... 54
12 Srg Rpbc nc hgwy ............................................................................................................................................... 55
13 l f rbz crss prcs ..................................................................................................................................... 55
14 Pr r ggg pcs ........................................................................................................................................................................ 56
14b Wr pr pp r ...................................................................................................................................................................... 56
Contents
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
16/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 xvii
15 lf xpccy dx (2009).......................................................................................................................................................... 57
16 edc dx (2009)...................................................................................................................................................................... 57
17 ic dx (2009) ........................................................................................................................................................................... 57
18 h Dp idx (2009) .............................................................................................................................................58
Tables
1.1 vr prc dcrs xpd by ggrpy ..................................................................................................2
1.2 vr dss c pr prc xpd ................................................................................................................. 7
1.3 vr scssss prc xpd ................................................................................................................81.4 arg rc yds crss Ppps ...............................................................................................................................11
1.5 Frrs/frr prrs by yp f cy (2002) ........................................................................................................13
1.6 ics Cs s. Cgy vy 1960 ................................................................................................................................... 21
1.7 Cpr cs f c sppg s. r-r sppg .....................................................................................23
1.8 tx ssg fr prcs, cs, cps, brgys ..................................................................................37
1.9 Dsrb f iRa d dd xpdrs .....................................................................................................................41
2.1 lrgs grs d srs f xpccy dx bw 1997 d 2009 .......................................................66
2.2 tp d b prcs f xpccy (1997 d 2009) .....................................................................................66
2.3 lrgs grs d srs dc dx bw 1997 d 2009 ................................................................. 67
2.4 lrgs grs d srs c dx bw 1997 d 2009 .......................................................................68
2.5 hDi grs d srs bw 1997 d 2009 .................................................................................................................71
2.6 hDi p d b prcs (1997) ........................................................................................................................................72
2.7 hDi p d b prcs (2009)........................................................................................................................................73
2.8 ls f prcs by yp f pr (1997-2009, 1997-2003, 2003-2009) ...............................................76
2.9 lrgs grs d srs GDi bw 1997 d 2009 ...........................................................................................79
2.10 GDi p d b prcs (1997)......................................................................................................................................... 80
2.11 GDi p d b prcs (2009) ........................................................................................................................................81
2.12 lrgs grs d srs qy dsrbd f xpccy dx bw 1997 d 2009 ..............83
2.13 lrgs grs d srs qy dsrbd dc dx bw 1997 d 2009 .........................84
2.14 lrgs grs d srs qy dsrbd c dx bw 1997 d 2009 ...............................85
2.15 tp 10 prcs w rgs sss hDi d qs ............................................................................ 862.16 tp 10 prcs w s sss hDi d qs.................................................................................86
2.17 tp 10 prcs w rk prs prsc f qs .............................................................87
2.18 tp 10 prcs w rk dcs prsc f qs ........................................................................... 87
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
17/199
xviii PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
Figures
1.1 lkg ggrpy d dp ...........................................................................................................................3
1.2 ac f grcr br prgr spdg, xcdg rrg (2001-2011) .......................................15
1.3 Sf-sffccy rs rc (2001-2011) ............................................................................................................................... 15
1.4 Scrs w wrs pry rcd ss bdg ..............................................................................................20
1.5 Sd dc pry cdc dr crp-r R&D pprc .........................................................20
1.6 lc rds d rr -grcr c .....................................................................................................................22
1.7 ipc f rfrs srcr d prs f r dsry ...............................................................232.1 Rsp bw pr cp c d hDi (1997-2009) ....................................................................................60
2.2 Rsp bw pr cp c d -c hDi .....................................................................................60
2.3 Rsp bw pr cp c grw d cg hDi (1997-2009) ...............................................61
2.4 Rsp bw pr cp c grw d cg -c hDi (1997-2009) ....................61
2.5 lf xpccy dx by prc (1997-2009) .................................................................................................................... 65
2.6 edc dx by prc (1997-2009) ................................................................................................................................ 67
2.7 ic dx by prc (1997-2009) ..................................................................................................................................... 68
2.8 h Dp idx by prc (1997-2009)........................................................................................................ 69
2.9 Dffr ps fr sr srg ps (1997-2009) ...............................................................................................70
2.10 hDi rk by prc 1997 d 2009 ..........................................................................................................................................74
2.11 Rk cprss f hDi d pr cp c (2009) .................................................................................................. 75
2.12 Prcs by yp f pr bw 1997 d 2009 ........................................................................................ 75
2.13 hDi rk d GDi rk by prc (2009) ............................................................................................................................... 77
2.14 Gdr Dp idx by prc (1997-2009) ........................................................................................................78
2.15 GDi rk by prc 1997 d 2009 ......................................................................................................................................... 82
2.16 eqy dsrbd f xpccy dx (1997-2009) ......................................................................................................83
2.17 eqy dsrbd dc dx (1997-2009).................................................................................................................84
2.18 eqy dsrbd c dx (1997-2009) ......................................................................................................................85
2.19 hDi d qy-djsd hDi (2009) ................................................................................................................................... 86
2.20 Prc rkg by hDi d ihDi (2009) ............................................................................................................................... 88
2.21 lsss f xpccy, dc, d c d qs by prc (2009) ................................89
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
18/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 xix
Boxes
1.1 Sp dpdc hDi cps ...................................................................................................................................... 4
1.2 a dsj pbc fr sys .............................................................................................................................9
1.3 Ccp frwrk fr dpg gr-cgc zs ........................................................................................12
1.4 W ds Da ry k k? ....................................................................................................................................................... 14
1.5 nr zrd d c cg ............................................................................................................................................. 16
1.6 Rxs, mdr or bfr d fr r-r rfrs .........................................................................................24
1.7 Dd-by-n rprs .................................................................................................................................................................... 251.8 aPeCo .......................................................................................................................................................................................................28
1.9 Dcgsg mr m: igrg mg m ......................................................................................................34
1.10 Dd fcs d grcr .........................................................................................................................38
1.11 twrd r rbs, cs, rs Ppp grcr ...................................................................................39
1.12 igrd pprc ntD cr: C w d br? ...................................................................................................42
2.1 t Gdr iqy idx d s ppc Ppps ...............................................................................77
2.2 t iqy-djsd h Dp idx .........................................................................................................85
Box Tables
1 mrs dcs fr hDi cps d pry cdc .............................................................................................4
2 arg mooe pr yp f rpr (2008-2011) ...................................................................................................25
3 Dd fcs ...............................................................................................................................................................38
4 Dd grcr fcs .................................................................................................................................................... 38
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
19/199
xx PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
Box Figures
1 lf xpccy (2009): obsrd s s. spy wgd rg f gbrs ..........................5
2 m yrs f scg (2008): obsrd s s. spy wgd rg f gbrs ........5
3 Pr cp c: obsrd s s. spy wgd rg f gbrs .....................................5
4 hDi (2009): obsrd s s. spy wgd rg f gbrs ...................................................5
5 Pry cdc (2009): obsrd s s. spy wgd rg f gbrs ....................5
6 assg f fcs d fr ks ..........................................................................................9
7 aeZ frwrk ......................................................................................................................................................................................128 Pbsd Da rgz cr .............................................................................................................................................. 14
9 mry cs f dgs d r zrd dcd dssrs (1985-2010) ..............................................17
10 mry sss s prcg f gr xpdrs d GDP ..............................................17
11 nbr f pp ffcd by r zrd dcd dssrs (1985-2011) ......................................................18
12 Css fr r zrd dcd dssrs (1985-2011) ................................................................................... 18
13 nbr f pp ffcd by yps d br f cds (1985-2011)...................................................19
14 arpr Csrs ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 26
15 Prfrc f frprs, Boi d PeZa (1996-2012) ....................................................................................................28
16 mr m, Cr lz, d Cbrz pp ss .........................................................................34
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
20/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 xxi
Abbreviations
aBRP agrcr Brcrcy Rsrcrg P
aDB as Dp Bk
aeZ agr-cgc z
aFma agrcr d Fsrs mdrz ac
aFmP agrcr d Fsrs mdrz P
aiP a is P
a.o. adsr ordr
aPeCo arr Pcfc ecc Z d Frpr ary
aPiS a Pry ic Sry
aRmm as Rg ms mdaSean assc f Ss as ns
aSeZa arr Spc ecc Z ary
asaiD asr agcy fr ir Dp
BaS Br f agrcr Sscs
BhS Brgy s
Boi Brd f iss
B.P. Bs Pbs
CaaP C a ary f Ppps
CaR Crdr adsr Rg
Cc Css ecs
Da Dpr f agrcr
DalY Dsby f yrsDBm Dpr f Bdg d mg
DenR Dpr f er d nr Rsrcs
Dped Dpr f edc
DilG Dpr f irr d lc Gr
DoF Dpr f Fc
Doh Dpr f h
DotC Dpr f trspr d Ccs
DPWh Dpr f Pbc Wrks d hgwys
e.o. exc ordr
Fao Fd d agrcr orgz
FBt Fdbr rd fc
FieS Fy ic d expdr Sry
Gaa Gr apprprs ac
GDD Grwg Dgr Dys
GDi Gdr-rd Dp idx
GDP Grss Dsc Prdc
Gii Gdr iqy idx
GnP Grss n Prdc
hDi h Dp idx
hDn h Dp nwrk
hDR h Dp Rpr
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
21/199
xxii PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
hiv h idfccy vrs
hPi h Pry idx
huC hgy rbzd cy
ihDi iqy-djsd h Dp idx
iPa is pr gcs
iRa ir R a
iRR ipg rs d rgs
JmC J mrd Crcr
lFS lbr Frc Sry
lGC lc Gr Cd
lGu lc gr
lSa lc sp crr
mDa mss drg dsr
mDG m Dp G
miGeDC mr i-Grs ecc Dp Cc
mo m obsrry
mooe mc d r prg xpss
mPi mds Pry idx
namRia n mppg d Rsrc ifr ary
nCR n Cp Rg
nDhS n Dgrpc d h Sry
neDa-iCC n ecc d Dp arys is Crd C
nGa n Gr agcy
nRRDmC n Dssr Rsk Rdc d mg Cc
nSCB n Ssc Crd Brd
nSo n Sscs offc
ntD ngcd rpc dsss
PaGaSa Ppp asprc, Gpysc, d asrc Srcs adsr
PCi Pr cp c
PDP Prc dp p
PDPFP Prc Dp d Pysc Frwrk P
PeF Pc d eqy FdPeZa Ppp ecc Z ary
PhDR Ppp h Dp Rpr
PmiS Ppp mr ifr Sys
PiDS Ppp is fr Dp Sds
PlPem Prc/lc Pg d expdr mg Gds
PPa Ppp Prs ary
PPFP Prc pysc frwrk p
PSu Prry spg
PSY Ppp Ssc Yrbk
R.a. Rpbc ac
Rhu Rr
R-r R-, r-ffRPt R prpry x
SaFDZ Srgc agrcr d Fsrs Dp Z
SeZ Spc cc z
Sth S-rsd fc
unDP ud ns Dp Prgr
unDP hDRo unDP h Dp Rpr offc
uPSe ursy f Ppps Sc f eccs
WB Wrd Bk
Who Wrd h orgz
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
22/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 xxiii
Philippine Provinces
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
23/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 1
[ibrr:] Gayunman, mahal ko ang ating bayan, tulad ninyo, hindi lamang dahil sa tungkulin ng lahat ng
tao ang magmahal sa bayang pinagkakautangan niya ng buhay at pagkakautangan marahil ng kanyang
huling hantungan, hindi lamang dahil gayon ang itinuro sa akin ng aking ama, kundi dahil Indio ang akingina, at dahil nabubuhay dito ang lahat ng pinakamagaganda kong alaala, mahal ko siya dahil utang ko sa
kaniya at uutangin ko pa ang aking kaligayahan!
At ako, dahil utang sa kaniya ang aking kasawian, bulong ni Elias.
fr Rzs Noli me Tangere1
Why geography?
HumaN developent s defned as the process that wdens the range o peoples choces,
the most crtcal o whch are to lead a long and healthy le, to be educated and
knowledgeable, and to enjoy a decent standard o lvng. Addtonal choces nclude
poltcal reedom, guaranteed human rghts, and sel-respect [UDP 1990].
Past volumes o the Philippine Hn Developent Report snce 1994 have
successvely montored the progress o human development across the countrys
regons and provnces, examnng the state o gender and development, basc
educaton and employment, as well as the mpact o armed conct. Beyond that,
the report o 2009 sought to explan the pace o polcy reorm tsel, observng that
progress n human development depends on nsttutons, .e., ormal laws and
regulatons as well as unwrtten codes and norms o socal acceptance and opprobrum: Deeper than polcesand larger than ndvduals, t s the nsttutons that structure behavor whch matter deeply or whether human
development advances or not [HD 2009].
What has yet to be taken ully nto account, however, s that human development takes place n physicl spce.
People locate themselves n spaces derentated by elevaton and slope, landorm and rock cover, temperature and
precptaton, accessblty, and exposure to natural hazards. These natural actors, at the very least, combne to nuence
ntal land potental and land use, the burden o dsease, settlements patternsand, ultmately, health, lvelhood, and
standards o lvng. Geography, n short, s a deep determnant o human development.
IGeography an Hman developmentin the Philippines
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
24/199
2 PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
the values o adjacent locatons. Hence, a locaton may
have a hgh value o the varable and neghbors wth hghvalues as well, or t may have a low value and low-value
neghbors or a gven varable. Another pattern may be
that a place ders rom ts neghbors, havng a low value
o the varable whle ts neghbors show hgh values (or
vce versa). The pont s that clusters mght be observed
n the spatal arrangement o varables beyond what
mght be expected rom chance alone.
As s evdent rom Maps 1 and 2, such clusters o
spatal dependence can be observed or per capta ncome
and HDi [Box 1.1]. Metro Manla, avte, Rzal, Bulacan,
Pampanga, and Benguet share smlarly hgh values wth
ther neghbors; call these hot spots. Meanwhle, Sulu
and Taw-Taw are locatons wth low values and have
neghbors that are smlarly stuated; these are cold spots.
Mountan Provnce and South otabato are outlers: the
ormer has low values but hgh-value neghbors, whle
the latter has hgh values but low-value neghbors. When
such neighborhood effects are statstcally controlled or, the
assocatons presented n olumn 2 o Table 1.1 mprove by
an average o 13.28 percentage ponts or 46 percent. More
detaled results are presented n olumn 3 o Table 1.1.eghborhood eects also matter through tme
[Mapa et al. 2013]. Ater controllng or demographc
and poltcal varables, spatal dependence s postvely
mplcated n the behavor o average ncome growth
rates o provnces between 1988 and 2009 [Maps 3 and
4]. On average, a 1 percentage pont ncrease n the
growth o per capta ncome o neghborng provnces
Table 1.1 Variation in provincial inicators
explaine by geography* (in percent)
Inicator (depenent variable)Geographic
factors*
Geographicfactors pls
neighborhooeffects**
lf xpccy (2009) 24.7 42.4
m yrs f scg (2008) 36.6 41.4
Pr cp c (2009)*** 31.6 40.2
ic pry cdc (2009) 47.2 54.2
hDi 2009 34.3 44.7
* expry rbs: c yp, sp, , wr s/dckd.n r fcrs r crd fr.** Sqr f crr f c Y d prdcd Y. a prxy sr frgdss-f-f sp g ds*** i PPP nCR 2000 pss
Wthn the Phlppnes, physcal space s unusually
dverse. Seldom does a terrtory as small as thePhlppne Archpelago possess so many vared and
unusual characterstcs [WS 1967].2
The archpelago comprses 7,107 slands, spannng
1,850 km. o ocean surace rom north to south, wth a
total land area o about 300,000 sq. km. and a coastlne
235, 973 km. long. islands are relatvely small, wth
mountanous nterors and narrow coasts, although
larger ones eature a broad array o hlls, plateaus,
and plans. Approxmately 65 percent o the land area
s consdered uplands, but there are also extensve
lowlands on the largest slands.
The country les n the humd tropcs, but temperatures
and precptaton are not unorm: temperatures n the
lowlands are not ound n the hghlands whle annual
precptaton can range rom a low o 965 mm. n somesouthern places to over 4,265 mm. along certan eastern
shores. lmatc varety s urther heghtened by alternatng
cycles o drought and ood3 as well as by typhoons whch
do not strke all areas equally.
internatonal research fnds that geography plays a
role n explanng the derent rates o recent economc
growth across countres [GSM 1999; Sachs 2003; AJR
2001, 2002; asterly and Levne 2003; and RST 2002]. The
obvous queston then presents tsel: does geography
also play a part n shapng local ncomes and outcomes
wthn a country lke the Phlppnes?
Table 1.1 strongly suggests that t does. it
summarzes how much o nterprovnce varaton n
human development outcomes (as descrbed n Part II)
s explaned by actors related to geography. olumn 2
o the table ndcates that varatons n clmate, slope,
elevaton, sea- or landlockedness explan some 25
percent o varaton n le expectancy across provnces;
37 percent o the varaton n mean years o schoolng;
and 32 percent o the varaton o per capta ncome
across provnces. it also explans 47 percent o varatonn the ncdence o provncal ncome poverty. Altogether,
as much as 34 percent o varaton n provncal HDis s
assocated wth varyng geographc actors.
Addtonal consderaton must be gven, however,
to sptil dependence n provncal ncomes and outcomes.
Spatal dependence occurs when observed values o
some varable or one locaton seem to be related wth
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
25/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 3
s assocated wth a 0.5 percentage pont ncrease n the
growth o per capta ncome o the home provnce.
Some locatons exhbt strong local neghborhood
eects over the perod: provnces n the Autonomous
Regon n Muslm Mndanao (ARMM), or example, and
a number o other provnces n Mndanao (Bukdnon,
Lanao orte, Sultan Kudarat) are cold spots. On the other
hand, Romblon and Marnduque are hot spots. astern
Samar, Mndoro Occdental, and Zambales have low
values but hgh-value neghbors.
That geography matters s not to say that t defnes
an nescapable destny. indeed, Table 1.1 suggests that
large portons o the varaton n provncal ncomes
and outcomes are stll unaccounted or by geographcal
condtons. Moreover, Box 1.1 suggests that whle
neghborhood eects are mportant, these may depend
on somethng more than just beng near or ar rom a
specfc locaton. in other words, whle physcal geography
may be fxed, socoeconomc outcomes need not be.We thereore need to know the ollowng: through
what channels does geography aect local outcomes?
What are the opportunty costs o not ully takng
condtons in sit nto account n the pursut o human
development? How can nsttutons better ensure
that challenges and opportuntes presented by local
geography are addressed or leveraged?
Figre 1.1 Linking geography an hman evelopment
How oes geographyinflence hmanevelopment across thePhilippines?
There are three routes by whch geography may be lnked
to ncomes and outcomes [Figure 1.1]: drectly, through
ts eect on human health and agrcultural productvty
(Arrow 1); ndrectly, through ts nuence on dstance
and the extent o market ntegraton (Arrow 2); and
ndrectly agan, through ts nuence on the qualty o
domestc nsttutons (Arrow 3).
These lnks are not always undrectonal, however.
For nstance, beng ntegrated nto markets can rase a
localtys ncomes by encouragng specalzaton and the
duson o technology (Arrow 4); but conversely, trade
can be the result (rather than the cause) o ncreasedproductvty (Arrow 5). Better nsttutons can rase
ncomes by acltatng more nvestment (Arrow 6), but
better nsttutons can also evolve rom a drect demand
or them due to a wealther, more educated, or more
empowered ctzenry (Arrow 7). Better nsttutons can
also evolve as ncreasng ntegraton creates pressure or
more openness (Arrow 8).
Source: Adopted from Rodrik and Subramanian [2003]
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
26/199
4 PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
SPatial dpdc ccrs w bsrs f c dpd s f r cs. a c y
g d g- gbrs, r w d w- gbrs, fr g rb. or y
w d g- gbrs, r rrs. t p s csrs r bsrd sp rrg
f rbs s byd w s b xpcd by cc .
Sp crr c b srd sg mrs idx [mr 1950]. t rg f pssb s fr mrs Is
fr -1 1, wr ps dcs crss ggrpc s, sr s r r ky dssr s
bw gbrs, d c rs.
mrs Ifr dcrs f dp d fr pry cdc r prsd Bx tb 1. a ps
, wc s crss prcs, sr s bw gbrs (g-g r w-w) r r ky
dssr s. W xcp f xpcd yrs f scg, s r sscy sgfc. (t s rss r
grd fr rr yrs.)
Box Table 1 Morans inices for HdI components an poverty incience
Variable Morans I Sd z-stat p-vale*
lf xpccy 2009 0.363 0.078 4.803 0.000
m yrs f scg 2008 0.363 0.078 4.821 0.000
expcd yrs f scg 2008 0.096 0.078 1.394 0.163
Pr cp c 2009 ( nCR 2000 pss) 0.367 0.078 4.893 0.000
hDi 2009 0.433 0.078 5.684 0.000
Pry cdc 2009 0.544 0.079 7.044 0.000
* tw-d s
mrs Igs s sg gb rs fr w d s. hwr, ds prd fr crcrscs
f sp csrg. a grpc yss ds s s mrs scrp. mrs scrp s fr qdrs, c
qdr rprsg spcfc kd f sp ssc bw prc d s gbrs w rspc rb
f rs. h s r rz w spy wgd rgs f gbrs s r rc.
nPrcs Qdr i (hh) g s d g- gbrs.
nPrcs Qdr iii (ll) w s d w- gbrs.
nPrcs Qdr ii (lh) w s d g- gbrs.
nPrcs Qdr iv (hl) g s d w- gbrs.
i dd, srs f c sp crr (lSa) p dfy pcks f cs wr csdrd p- s xry prcd [o d G 2005]. Prcs w sgfc c sp crr Qdr
i r kw s sps. ts Qdr iii r kw s cd sps. Prcs Qdrs ii d iv r p sp
rs. 1
Bx Fgrs 1 5 r mrs scrps fr c f rbs, ggg sps, cd sps, d sp rs.
1 o d G [2005] (p://ssp2005.prc.d/bsrcs/51529).
Box 1.1 Spatial epenence in HdI components
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
27/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 5
Box Figre 1 Life expectancy (2009)obsrd s s. spy wgdrg f gbrs
Box Figre 2 Mean years of schooling (2008)obsrd s s. spy wgdrg f gbrs
Box Figre 3 Per capita incomeobsrd s s. spy wgdrg f gbrs
Box Figre 4 HdI (2009)obsrd s s. spy wgdrg f gbrs
Box Figre 5 Poverty incience (2009)obsrd s s. spy wgdrg f gbrs
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
28/199
6 PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
Hman health
Geography and health are ntrnscally lnked. Where
persons are born, lve, study, and work drectly nuences
ther health experences. Ths s due to the ar they
breathe, the ood they eat, the vruses they are exposed
to, and the health servces they can access [Drummer
2008].
The range and ntensty o dseases, especally
vector-borne ones,4 are aected by natural condtons
such as clmate and topography [Gallup and Sachs 2000].
Such dseases contrbute sgnfcantly to the dsease
burden n tropcal countres, whch on average have
per capta ncomes only a thrd o those o nontropcal
countres [Gallup 2000]. ross-country studes ndcate
that envronments conducve to dseaseas represented
by the prevalence o malarahave sgnfcant negatveeects on economc perormance [artensen and
Gundlach 2006; and GS 2000].
ill health can be expected to contrbute to
mpovershment. it has been estmated that malara s
responsble or around 46 mllon dsablty-adjusted
le years5 (or DALY), .e., years o healthy or productve
le lost due to llness, dsablty, and premature death.
The estmated total burden on households can go up to
a catastrophc 32 percent o annual ncome or the very
poor.6 Schstosomass, on the other hand, s responsble
or anywhere between 3 mllon and 70 mllon DALY.
The costs o these and other chronc llnesses
nvolve the drect monetary costs o mtgatng and
managng recurrng sckness and the opportunty costs
o lost schoolng or work or the ll or those who care or
them. These costs can have longer-term mplcatons
on a households economyts assets, ncome levels
and consumpton patterns, debt, and lvelhood
sustanabltyas well as on an ndvduals cogntve
development, educaton levels, and lelong capabltes
[Russel 2004]. The chronc nammatory processassocated wth long-term schstosomass, or example,
contrbutes to anema and undernutrton, whch can
lead to growth stuntng, poor school perormance, low
work productvty, and contnued poverty [Kng 2010].
Malara s the nnth leadng cause o morbdty n
the Phlppnes and s ound n 58 out o 80 provnces,
wth nearly 14 mllon people at rsk [DOH 2011].7 Most o
the countrys malara cases occur n orested, swampy,
hlly and mountanous regons n Luzon and Mndanao,
and among upland subsstence armers, orest related
workers, ndgenous peoples, and mgrant agrcultural
workers. Schstosomass s endemc n 1,230 barangays
across 28 provnces, wth approxmately 12 mllon at
rsk and 2.5 mllon drectly exposed.Surpassed only by
tuberculoss and malara n prevalence, transmsson o
schstosomass s hghly dependent on the dstrbuton
o ts ntermedate snal host, whch n turn s hghly
dependent on annual ranall patterns and local
topography [Belzaro et al. 2007; and Blas et al. 2004].
Rce felds, streams, and creeks are potental breedng
grounds, and rrgaton systems can transport hosts nto
prevously nonendemc areas [Leonardo 2012]. Farmers,
resh water fshermen, and chldren are especally
vulnerable.Four other neglected tropcal dseases (TDs) are
endemc to the Phlppnes and need to be accounted
or [Maps 5 to 8]. Lke schstosomass, these TDs do
not cause nstant death but chronc dsabltes and
deormtes that hamper the growth and development
o chldren, as well as the productvty o adults.8 The
our are (a) lymphatc flarass (elephantass or tibk),
the second leadng cause o permanent and long-term
dsablty n the country, endemc n 43 provnces and
nectng about 645,000 persons [DOH 2011]; (b) sol-
transmtted helmnth nectons or STH (e.g., hookworm,
tapeworm) whch nect about 66 percent o preschool
chldren, 67 percent o school-age chldren, and up to
43.1 percent o the general populaton at the provncal
level;9 (c) oodborne trematode (FBT) nectons, the ull
extent o whch s stll unknown but whose prevalence
at the barangay level has been observed to be as hgh as
36 percent;10 and (d) leprosy. Women and chldren lvng
n remote areas or wthout access to eectve health care
are most commonly at rsk to TDs.
The ndvdual and household socoeconomc mpacto TDs s, sadly, understuded.11 One rare attempt to
quanty local eects n our endemc barangays n
Leyte provnce estmated the productve days lost per
schstosomass-nected person per year to be 45.4
person days, wth the dsease peakng among the 10-19
age group [Blas et al. 2006].12 Flarass s estmated to
account or $4.4 mllon n annual losses rom decreased
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
29/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 7
productvty and ncreased costs o care.13
There are no estmates or the local mpact o
STH, but nternatonal evdence ndcates t could deal
a severe blow, especally at the most vulnerable stage
o le. Results rom rgorous mpact evaluatons o
benefts rom school-based mass dewormng are
tellng: n the short term, a reducton o absenteesm
by 25 percent and an addtonal year to the
average chlds educaton ( dewormed throughout
elementary school); n the long term, a 34 percent
reducton n work days lost to llness, a 12 percent
ncrease n hours worked, and an mprovement n
wage earnngs (21-29 percent) [JPAL 2007; and Bard
et al. 2011]. School-based mass dewormng has n
act been descrbed as the most cost-eectve way to
ncrease school partcpaton (o all the alternatves
that have been rgorously evaluated) as well as oneo the most cost-eectve ways to mprove health
known [JPAL 2007].
Are malara and TD dsease burden assocated
wth low levels o human development, and does t matter
or the dspartes observed across the country? There
s evdence or sayng, yes. A postve and sgnfcant
correlaton exsts between the overlappngoccrrence o
dseases, on the one hand, and poverty ncdence, on the
other [PF 2011].14 That s, the presence o greater varety
o tropcal dseases n a provnce over the last fve years
s assocated wth a hgher ncdence o ncome poverty;
less varety s assocated wth lower poverty ncdence.
Put derently, tropcal dseases tend to overlap one
another n areas where the ncdence o ncome poverty
s hgher [Map 9]. it s surprsng, however, that no strong
correlaton exsts between the recorded prevalence o
any one dsease and an array o provncal or muncpal
poverty ndcators.15
The drecton o causaton may go ether way. On the
one hand, the correlaton depcted n Map 9 may ndcate
the cumulatve negatve eects on human productvtyand ncome that results rom chronc parastc nectons
(o any type), whch oten co-occur.16 On the other hand, t
could reect the obvous pont that poorer communtes
are less able to elmnate or control dseases when these
occur, or that poor lvng condtons (e.g., nadequate
envronmental santaton, poor personal hygene)
acltate the transmsson o certan parastes.
Whle the latter nterpretaton s ar, t would
be mstaken to conclude that rsng ncomes per se
are sufcent to take care o these health threatsan
nerence that removes the problem rom ts physcal
context. in act, closer examnaton suggests that the
overlappng occurrence o dseases s more strongly
assocated wth geography than wth poverty ncdence.
in partcular, geography explans twce the percentage
o varaton n the occurrence o overlappng dseases
than does ncome poverty [Table 1.2].
Table 1.2 Variation in isease cont* per provinceexplaine (in percent)
Correlate Ajste R2
ic pry cdc (2009) 13.31
Ggrpy (c, s ckd, dckd) 26.76
* PeF [2011]Source: Authors computation
Why the weak correlatons between poverty
and specfc TDs? Ths may be an artact o poor or
ncompatble data.
Frst, survey-based poverty data may not be
representatve at a scale wth enough detal to
derentate specfc ecologcal condtons assocated
wth vector-borne dseases. ommunty-based poverty
data (.e., down to the barangay level), avalable, may
provde a better resoluton, but then the qualty o
avalable dsease data to correlate t wth s qute poor.
The latter s attrbutable to how normaton s collected
by local publc health servces, whch utlze more
passve orms o communty survellance and whch may
be lmted by manpower, resources, and accessblty
o endemc stes (typcally ar rom health centers).17
Sklled local health personnel who mght provde
accurate dagnostc servces are also n short supply.One assessment showed that only 58.5 percent o the
postve schstosomass specmens were correctly read
by feld mcroscopsts [Belzaro et al. 2007]; n another,
the extent o msdagnoss o an FBT ranged rom 16 to 25
percent [Belzaro et al. 1997]. Renecton s also not ully
accounted or [Belzaro et al. 2004]. in short, there may
be gross underreportng as well as msdagnoss.18
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
30/199
8 PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
Data avalable at natonal repostores are also o
uneven qualty. Malara, whose reducton s an explct
Mllennum Development Goal (MDG), and flarass,
whose elmnaton was declared a prorty by the
World Health Assembly n 1997, seem to be handled by
programs that are relatvely stable n terms o undng,
strategy, and protocols. Schstosomass, STH, and FBT
have not been as ortunate, however.19 Schstosomass
stll has no clear control strategy despte the avalablty
o eectve control tools [Belzaro et al. 2007], and STH
seems to be saddled wth coordnaton problems n
program mplementaton (e.g., the coverage o publc
school-based dewormng n 2011 was only 70 percent)
and data storage (avalable STH data are regonal and
o vntage 2004). o database exsts or FBT although
a frst natonal baselne or FBT s scheduled or 2013
[Hernandez, personal communcaton].Poor dsease data also seem to be a drect result o the
nadvertent breakdown o the publc health normaton
system ater the devoluton o health servces n 1991.
What used to be a coherent management normaton
system that owed rom barangay health statons (BHS)
to muncpal-level rural health unts (RHU), to dstrct and
provncal health ofces, then urther up to the regonal
and natonal levels, was cut n two places: between
the RHUs and dstrcts and between the provnce and
regonal centers [Box 1.2].
That gatherng better data s a crucal frst step s
demonstrated by the act that when data rom a 2005-
2008 schstosomass survey were used, whose desgn
attempted to actor n the ocal and nonrandom nature o
the paraste across provnces, apostve assocaton wthncome poverty dd emerge [Table 1.3]. The stronger
assocaton wth geography stll remaned, however,
and revealed a sharper pcture, one whch supported
questons about the valdty o the tradtonal profle
o a schstosomass endemc provnce [Leonardo et
al. 2012].20
Lnks wth hydrologcal (e.g., rrgaton) andsocoeconomc (e.g., ertlzer trade) connectvty were
also hghlghted as was ts co-occurrence wth STH and
FBT nectons.
ven so, the ocal and nonrandom nature o the
paraste within provnces may stll not have been
captured by the survey.21 The derved prevalence or
Agusan del Sur was only 3.9 percent, ar lower than the
derved prevalence o 31.8 percent rom a survey n two
muncpaltes o the same provnce surveyed at about
the same tme [Belzaro et al. 2007]. The result o such
underreportng at the scale where t counts s not just an
underestmaton o the magntudes o the dsease, but an
nattenton to ts loctions, whch then become the bassor polcymakng, plannng, and und allocatons.22
Threats to human health are ste-specfc and
have potentally large human development costs. But
ther ull extent s under-apprecated. These threats
have spatal peculartes ndcatng that rsng ncomes
alone wll not sufce n ther control or elmnaton.
important ntrasectoral and ntersectoral spllovers are
also nvolved n ther persstence.e., spllovers n the
prevalence o derent dseases, cross-dsease control,
envronmental health, and agrcultural nterventons
as well as n ther mpacts, e.g., across health, educaton
perormance, and lvelhood. Spllovers must be taken
nto account n consderng any publc health approach.
The mplcaton s that actons must be drect and
ntegratedlocally. integrated because ths s what
efcency demands, n the lght o spllovers; and locally
ntegrated, not only or practcal reasons23 but because
provnces have the most at stake n seeng ntegraton
succeed. urrently, however, provnces have lttle to
do wth the plannng or or delvery o qualty basc
qualty health servces (as dscussed urther below).Moreover, natonal-level agents nterpret ntegraton
as co-mplementaton across dsease control programs
[Hernandez, personal communcaton], an nterpretaton
that at best ams to reduce operatonal waste and save
on costs across vertcally organzed natonal health
programs.
But ntegraton can ental and acheve ar more
Table 1.3 Variation in schistosomiasis prevalence
explaine* (in percent)
Correlate Ajste R2
ic pry cdc (2009) 5.41
Ggrpy (c, , sckd,dckd)*
15.67
* Scssss prc fr lrd . [2012]Source: Authors computation
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
31/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 9
varaton n precptaton has a partcularly proound
eect upon the dstrbutonal patterns o the natural
vegetaton, the qualty o tropcal sols, and even
the cultural landscape [WS 1967:46]. Based on the
dstrbuton o ranall n the country, our broad clmate
types can be delneated [Map 10]. But varatons can
stll occur wthn each type because o such actors as
elevaton. lmate and parent-sol materal gve the
Phlppnes a wde range o sols, some o whch are very
rch and some qute poor.24 rops n turn are selected on
the bass o water avalablty (e.g., rce versus corn), and
crop choce determnes croppng systems and assocated
cultural patterns.
verythng else beng equal, clmate and sols
determne an areas agrcultural prospects, .e., tscomparatve advantage or dsadvantage wth respect to
types o crop. The mplcatons o a broad range o natural
varaton can thereore be crtcal or an agrculturally
orented populaton.
As an llustraton, Map 11 presents one possble
mappng o agro-ecologcal zones (AZs) across the
country based on temperature, mosture, slope,
Box 1.2 A isjoint pblic health information system
The sys s p 1960s frd
fw f fr fr brgy ss
(BhS) cr ffc f Dpr f
h css w cry gd pbc
sys [Bx Fgr 6]. W srcs wr
dd c grs 1992, fr ks
wr srd (bd, dsd s): bw rr s
(Rhu) d ffcs dsrcs d prcs, d
bw dsrc/prc ffcs d Dohs rg
ffcs d cr ffc.
h srcs f dpd csb crr d
gy rbzdfc dpdy f prc
y r ggrpcy cd d fr s cssry srd.
Box Figre 6 Assignment of health fnctionsan health information links
hard and strategc choces are made to nternalze ntra-
and ntersectoral spllovers wthn and across localtes.
Beyond the possble savngs or natonal programs, an
ntegrated approach can potentally delver mproved
educaton results, hgher adult productvty, overall local
growth, and human development.
Agricltral proctivity
Geography s drectly ted to agrcultural prospects
through landorms, topography, temperature, and
precptaton, whch combne to determne clmate and
sol types. Geography thus has ts greatest mpact at
low levels o development, when tradtonal agrculture
domnates a local economy [Gallup 2000]. in thePhlppnes, the ncdence o ncome poverty s three
tmes greater among agrcultural households than
among all other households combned; two o every three
ncome-poor persons depend drectly on agrculture or
employment and sustenance. The low ncomes observed
prmarly reect low productvty.
O the many eatures o Phlppne geography,
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
32/199
10 PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
elevaton, and sol order. Methodologcally, temperature
and mosture ndces were combned to defne seven
agro-clmatc zones, whch were n turn cross-tabulated
wth our agro-edaphc zones defned rom combnatons
o topography and sol order categores [Box 1.3]. The
combnaton produces 26 categores or the Phlppnes
AZs, provdng an ecology-based dvson o space,
emphaszng general sutablty or agrculture or
potental or agrculture [Manla Observatory 2012]. The
shares o each o the resultng AZs n total land area
range rom 0.07 to 19.53 percent, wth the three largest
shares gong to zones characterzed by crtcal sols
requrng ntensve management.25 indeed, 53 percent o
the sols across the Phlppnes are such crtcal sols.
it s mportant to note that these AZs do not clam
to mply a specfc crop or development potental n the
sense o the best use o land [ibd.]. Further layers onormaton are requred or ths purpose.26 Map 11 s
smply one pcture o relatve terrestril condtons at the
meso level, based on bophyscal condtons measured
over a long perod.
onetheless, at least one mportant pont s revealed:
there s a wde varety o AZs across the country whch,
even when delberately lmted to a manageable number,27
do not neatly correspond to admnstratve dvsons.
That s, there may be AZ homogenety across an area
lke the entral Plan o Luzon, or AZ heterogenety
wthn an sland or a provnce, such as n egros Orental
or astern Samar. in act, types o AZ are not unormly
dstrbuted across space, mplyng that strategc areas
or specfc agrculture may not be ether. it s not even
clear that all admnstratve dvsons have an area that
s strategc agrculturally.
On ths bass alone, t can be argued that land-
based agrcultural prospects are to be realzed, then
no one-sze-fts-all approach to producton and
arm management wll work. instead, a wde range o
technology and approaches must be made avalablethrough hghly customzed agrcultural extenson
servces that can be matched wth ndvdual arms
[Ponce 2006].
Unortunately, governance o the agrcultural sector
s currently unable to aord extenson servces o ths
knd. Rather, extenson servces are hghly centralzed
and perunctorly conceved, wth practcally no budget
or the development o extenson sklls among local
government personnel or extenson acltes, or the
mprovement o organzatonal management [Ponce
2006]. Meanwhle, the sector contnues to nvest heavly
n the provson o producton support n the orm
o subsdzed seeds, ertlzers, machnery, and post-
harvest aclteswhch are bascally prvate goods
whose allocaton across local governments has lttle
ratonal bass.
The alure to provde customzed extenson
servces to help local arms respond to vared bophyscal
condtons causes the persstently large varablty n
rce yeld per hectare wthn and between producton
envronments (.e., rrgated, ran-ed, upland). Ths
varablty s seen n Table 1.4, whch shows average gaps
n rce yelds across the country and the actors that have
been dentfed as explanng such gaps.The table ndcates that yeld gaps are about fve
tons per hectare n the wet season to about sx tons
per hectare n the dry season, wth about one-thrd
accounted or by the alure to address mcronutrent,
pest, and crop management problems; another thrd
due to the alure to address macronutrent defcences
and water problems; and the fnal thrd because o the
alure to work around fxed actors such as weather,
sol texture, and hydrology (oodng). The opportunty
cost o ths last category s thus a 25 percent ncrease n
yeld per hectare oregone. Overall, the opportunty cost
o alng to provde customzed extenson servces can
amount to a 150 percent ncrease n yeld oregone.
More undamentally, the undue ocus on rce at
the expense o other mportant crops and sources o
protenthe explct pursut orice self-sfciency tsel
reects a dsconnect between the overarchng goals o
human development and ts nsttutonal embodment
n the agrcultural sector. Bascally, sector goals mss
the mark by ocusng on rce sel-sufcency at all
costsrather than on cost-eectveood securty. Thsmsdrected ocus on producton rather than on arm
ncomes then becomes translated nto napproprate
strateges, .e., strateges that are overly centralzed,
vertcally organzed by commodty, and domnated by
rce. it s ultmately reected n aulty budget allocatons,
such as allocatons or producton nputs rather than or
technology and other publc goods.
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
33/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 11
ven Republc Act 8435, the Agrcultural and
Fsheres Modernzaton Act (AFMA), defned ood
securty as avalablty, adequacy, accessblty, and
aordablty o ood supples at all tmes but went on
to emphasze sufcency n our staple ood, namely
rce and whte corn, whch subsequently eclpsed all
other concerns o the law.28 oherence and ocus n an
agencys operatons requre coherence and clarty n
ts organzaton, somethng that has so ar eluded the
Department o Agrculture (DA), however [Box 1.4].
The commodty approach to agrculture s
especally dsconnected wth realtes on the ground
one notes that local armers are typcally engaged n a
mult-commodty actvty [Table 1.5] desgned manly
to mnmze rsk, a strategy that provdes access to
a secure ood source n tmes o clmatc adversty
[Banko 2007]. Ths dsconnect s bound to be magnfedby the mpacts o clmate change.
The commodty approach also neglects fsheres,
partcularly muncpal fsheres, and o coastal resource
management more generally. Muncpal fsheres
account or 85 percent o fsheres employment, and
ther contrbuton to total fsheres producton n terms
o both volume and value has dropped progressvely n
recent years [AFMP 2010]. Fsherolk suer the hghest
poverty ncdence among nne basc sectors, .e., 41.4
percent n 2009, an ncrease rom 35 percent n 2003 and
a fgure hgher than or armers (36.7 percent) and the
general populaton (26.5 percent).29
The proxmate cause o ths deteroraton
seems to be overfshng brought about by coastal
area degradaton, among others, whch n turn s
lnked to what s done on land and oten n the
name o agrcultural development (e.g., clearng o
mangroves or fsh or shrmp ponds and other agro-
ndustral ventures). Fshery resources provde the
most mportant source o proten or most people, and
coastal ecosystems provde the breedng and eednggrounds or marne le. However, ther crtcal role
n peoples health and economc well-beng does not
seem to count or much, even wthn that sector.30
That the current approach to agrculture s ar rom
the mark s not hard to see. Between 2001 and 2010,
rce support clamed 47 percent o the budget o P52.8
bllon (excludng rrgaton).31 Durng the same perod,
Table 1.4 Average rice yiels across the Philippines
Average grain yiel (t/ha/season)*
Constraints an their opportnity costs (interms of yiel increase)
Wss
Dryss
Csrs oppry cs
8.13** 10.17** Sd qy, c
6.51 8.13
Fxd fcrs sc sry, c, sxr, ydrgy (.g.,fdg)
25%
4.88 6.10mcrrsdfccs d wrprbs
33%
3.25 4.07
S crrdfccs, pssd crp gprbs
50%
* Average across hybrid seeds, certified seeds, and good seeds** Maximum attainable yield fluctuates from year to year by +- 10 percent.Source: Table 3.2, Sebastian et al. [2006]
however, sel-sufcency n rce even declned by 10
percentage ponts rom 91.29 percent to 81.27 percent
[Figures 1.2 and 1.3]. in 2011, rce clamed an even larger
slce o the pe (52.4 percent), and a sharp percentage
pont ncrease n the sel-sufcency rato was recorded.
However, the latter was acheved only by holdng down
mports to one-thrd ts level n 2010 and then drawng
down the countrys rce stocksan unsustanable
strategy.32 onversely and unsurprsngly, support to
subsectors where poverty ncdence s much hgher, such
as fsheres and coconut, was crowded out [Figure 1.4],
and potental reductons n overall poverty ncdence
approaches had been more crop-neutralwere oregone
[Figure 1.5].33
in short, the sngle commodtyproducton ocus
has been costly, has undermned ood securty, and has
ultmately been antpoor [Pars and Antporta 2006].
As n the case o health, an ntegrated area
approach s needed n order to rase arm productvty
and mprove ood securty. The dawnng realzaton
o the eects o clmate change s a urther reason toserously doubt the eectveness o the current crop-
based, centralzed approach to agrculture, and ndeed
o current plannng practce n general [Box 1.5]. The
nature o agrculture requres plannng along agro-
ecologcal zones whch, n an archpelagc context,
must also nclude marne ecosystems as well as
orests, water, and other natural resources that are
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
34/199
12 PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013
Box 1.3 Conceptal framework for eveloping agro-ecological zones
AS bckgrd ppr fr s ,
m obsrry ws d fr
ecgy-bsd sp frwrk fr
r hDi yss. a df f gr-
cgc zs (aeZs) ws cd by wy f xp (k
fr p://rscc.rg) fwd by qs:
G ggrpc r fd crss cry, c
cgy-bsd ds f spc sc s aeZ ccp
b r sf fr rprg hDis d frg pcy? t
sdy ws cd df f aeZs r r
cgy-bsd sp frwrk r Ppps
s w s ccpyg cc dscss f rbs
d s.t ccp d dgc frwrk fy
prpsd by m obsrry s prsd Bx Fgr
7. i fcsd rgg w wr cd gr-cc d
gr-dpc zs. a prry s f rbs fr c
yp f z ws scd d cbd p fr.
t cc f s prry s f rbs ws y
drd by r by spf fr, wc s
prprry arcvw/arcGiS. t rss r rsbdry
aeZs spg cry [m obsrry 2012:7].
Fr gr-dpc rbs, wd d pd rs
wr grzd sg crr f p 100
fr wd rs, w r sp csss wr spcfd
bsd 1991 cssfc f Fd d agrcr
orgz r Fao: gy dg (0-8 prc),
rg y (8-30 prc), d spy dsscd
s (> 30 prc). S rdr dfs fd
2011 ecycpd Brc wr sd d grpgs wr
gdd by B . [2006].
Fr gr-cc rbs, y sfr r rbs fr Cc Rsrc u t-
srs ds rs 3.1 (CRu tS3.1) wr sd.
t f s f ps d cc s, g w
cs fr rwrs, c b dwdd fr hDn
wbs (p://www.d.rg.p).
Box Figre 7 AEZ framework
Temperatre Moistre inex Soil orerTopography:
elevation, slope
Agro-eaphic zones
AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES
Climate anmoistre regimes
(Agro-climatic zones)
8/22/2019 2013 Philippine Human Development Report Geography and Human Development
35/199
PhiliPPine human DeveloPment RePoRt 2012/2013 13
central to the vablty o agrcultural assets. Plannng
clearly cannot be done on a per-crop or per-commodty
bassagan a vertcally organzed approachnor by
muncpaltes, whch are too small geographcally to
horzontally ntegrate mportant components. instead,
ths ponts to the provnce as the plannng doman,
supported by natonal servces organzed along
unctonal (research and development, extenson, and
regulaton) lnes.
Accessibility an market integration
The nature o geographc advantage n economc terms
changes over tme [Gallup and Sachs 1999]. As an
economy develops and expands nto manuacturng
and servces, geographcal advantage may no longer
come rom agrcultural productvty but rom distnceor access to markets. Dstance here reers to somethng
more than physcal (or straght-lne) dstance. it s
the ease or dfculty by whch labor moves, goods are
transported, and captal ows and servces are delvered
between two locatons [WB 2009].34 Access to places
wth the greatest economc densty or hghest market
potental.e., leding placess crucal or trade and or
the compettveness o an areas ndustry and servces.
Lgging areas are typcally economcally dstant rom
such leadng places.
Topography and landorms help determne how
accessble an area can be [Gallup 2000]. internatonal
studes have ound that coastal regons or regons lnked
to coasts by ocean-navgable waterways are strongly
avored n development relatve to nteror regons, whle
landlocked economes are dsadvantaged even located
the same dstance rom the coast as nteror areas o
coastal regons.35
The selecton o Manla as the economc center and
admnstratve captal o the Phlppnes s consstent
wth ths story: ts harbor and the commercal poston ots port wth respect to the hna trade were o greatest
nterest to the Spansh conqustadors. Manlas poston
as a natural transportaton center or both overland
and water-based connectons to mportant parts o the
archpelago also made t a strategc choce [WS 1967].
What currently makes the rest o the Phlppne
provnces or muncpaltes more or less dstant, however,
Table 1.5 Farmers/farmer operatorsby type of activity (2002)
Crop farming Nmber of farmersShare to total
farmers*
Rc 2,152,289 44.9
Cr 1,460,318 30.4
Sgr 167,923 3.5
Cc 2,607,825 54.4
mg 1,975,946 41.2
B 2,286,597 47.7
Ppp 140,058 2.9
Rbbr 38,190 0.8
Cff 273,156 5.7
Livestock anpoltry raising
Nmber of growers Share to totalgrowers**
C 924,631 22.5
Crb 1,525,195 37.1
hgs 2,058,950 50.1
G 659,771 16
hrs 228,013 5.5
or sck 66,011 1.6
Cck 3,465,235 84.3
Dck 437,790 10.6
or pry 31,419 0.8
* Total number of crop farmers is 4,796,995** Total number of growe rs is 4,112,84 0Shares exceed 100% in both cases owing to multiple activities.Source: Abad Santos and Piza [2009], based on Census of Agriculture 2002, NationalStatistics Office
nvolves more than just havng a coast or not. Beng n an
archpelago, 65 out o 80 provnces, coverng 82.7 percent
o ctes and muncpaltes, do have coasts. But these
provnces nclude sland provnces, such as Batanes andRomblon, as well as provnces on the ar eastern sde such
as Qurno, Quezon, astern Samar, and Surgao del Sur,
where access s lkely to be seasonal or tme-ntensve. ot