An Age-Old Problem

To support current population growth, the economy needs to grow by 10% annually – a tall order indeed

Among the many social dilemmas that confront the country, one of the most contentious is the population. Even though many emphasize the need to curb population, President Arroyo has not considered it a top priority. There are basically two opposing schools of thought on the matter. One side argues that unabated population growth results in more poverty and underdevelopment because society cannot afford the necessary investment in infrastructure, health care, housing and education, and other basic needs. Thus population growth should be managed. The other view contends that population growth does not necessarily cause poverty but adds to a country’s advantage in terms of human capital or labor force.

At over 83 million, the Philippines is now the 12th most populous nation in the world following China, India, United States, Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, Russia, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Japan, and Mexico. According to the National Statistical Coordination Board estimates based on the 2000 Census, the country’s population will reach 93 million in 2010, just five years from now. The country’s total fertility rate (TFR) is 3.5 children per family but if the computation is broken down to the class level, the poorest quintile has a TFR of 5.9 children per family, 3.5 for the middle quintile and 2.0 for the richest quintile. About 40% of the population (or 32 million people) are subsisting below US$1 a day. The poverty incidence in the country rises from 9.8% for a family of one to 57.3% for a family size of nine, and that is withstanding extraneous factors like calamities, price increases, and economic instability, which aggravate a family’s situation. The need to curb population growth is highlighted by the fact that the government is having difficulties in balancing financial obligations and addressing the needs of the people.

The Philippines has failed to take advantage of the “demographic bonus” – the situation where the number of working-age population is higher than the number of young and old dependents. Instead, the country is experiencing what economists would call a “demographic onus” – having a large number of young dependents relative to its workforce size. Unlike its neighboring Asian countries like Thailand and Indonesia which have successfully overcome the dilemma of population and are now facing other issues such as competitiveness and enhanced participation in the global arena, the Philippines has remained stuck in the old-age problem of population. It is obvious that the country cannot afford to support the growing population, and with the current fiscal situation, the government is already hard-pressed to find alternative means of supporting the country.

On the other hand, those who argue against curbing population insist that the problem lies not in the growing number of Filipinos born by the second but in the perennial problem of corruption and mismanagement of resources by the country’s public servants. They point that the institution of a two-child policy as a means to reduce the population does not necessarily mean the reduction of poverty incidence in the country. They emphasize that proper policies and the provision of education and training for the labor force are powerful tools in uplifting the lives of a poverty-stricken population.

According to a study conducted by the Asian Institute of Management, should the country proceed with its current population growth rate, the economy would have to expand by at least 10% per year for the next 10 years to meet the needs of the people. The government would also have to prepare itself for the demands of a huge population on the country’s resources such as energy, food, utilities, education and health services, and infrastructure. Whatever option the government chooses – either the achievement of 10% annual economic growth or the implementation of an effective population reduction scheme – there is no question that both alternatives require certain degrees of sacrifice. It is up to the government to decide which one is less painful to take.