Fiscal policy
Consider/comment on the extent to which fiscal policy is pro-poor in your country or in one with which you are familiar.
While the rest of the world zigs, the Philippines zags. In the era of East Asian growth, when our neighbors grew into industrialization, we fell short of all expectations and became "the sick man of Asia." In theories of growth of developing countries, we did agriculture but fumbled industrialization and moved right on to services.
We were recently granted our first investment grade ratings from Fitch and S&P; but in the midst of the much-lauded feat, poverty incidence appeared practically unchanged: 27.9% in the first quarter of 2012, from 28.6% in 2009 (and 28.8% in 2006). Our country is growing (even beating China in the first quarter of 2013), but it is only now that the administration is pushing for inclusive growth, perhaps because, oops, Filipinos don't feel economic statistics.
I think the Aquino administration's fiscal policy means well, however we are still waiting for the effects to trickle down to the poor. Nothing came to mind when I saw the word "pro-poor" except the Pantawid program (conditional cash transfer), which has gathered some favorable results in improving the welfare of the poor (to the point that the President just approved its extension to high school grants). This is perhaps the program most visibly pro-poor, and it is working; but infrastructure spending, which has been reaching new heights, is not delivering improvement. The government is spending on transportation infrastructure, specifically, with the aim of connecting the poor in rural areas to jobs in the city and easing the movement of goods from the provinces to urban consumers - but too many factors are delaying these projects even from procurement, that we are still waiting for roads and rails that will take the nation's growth to its people.
Those, on the expenditure side. With regard to taxes, the Philippines has improved its revenues from better collection, as part of Aquino's "matuwid na daan" theme. New taxes have as well been introduced, most notably the higher sin taxes that hiked prices of alcohol and cigarettes (prior to the law, the Philippines sold the lowest-priced cigarettes in Southeast Asia).
The country's fiscal policy looks good, even as it pushes harder for inclusive growth. I believe the challenge to this country is truly governance - for agencies in transportation and public works to step up and use government money to build infrastructure that will benefit the poor, for agencies in internal revenue and customs to beef up their collection efforts, and for policymakers, to evaluate taxes and projects and ensure that the Philippines' growth reaches the Filipinos.
While the rest of the world zigs, the Philippines zags. In the era of East Asian growth, when our neighbors grew into industrialization, we fell short of all expectations and became "the sick man of Asia." In theories of growth of developing countries, we did agriculture but fumbled industrialization and moved right on to services.
We were recently granted our first investment grade ratings from Fitch and S&P; but in the midst of the much-lauded feat, poverty incidence appeared practically unchanged: 27.9% in the first quarter of 2012, from 28.6% in 2009 (and 28.8% in 2006). Our country is growing (even beating China in the first quarter of 2013), but it is only now that the administration is pushing for inclusive growth, perhaps because, oops, Filipinos don't feel economic statistics.
I think the Aquino administration's fiscal policy means well, however we are still waiting for the effects to trickle down to the poor. Nothing came to mind when I saw the word "pro-poor" except the Pantawid program (conditional cash transfer), which has gathered some favorable results in improving the welfare of the poor (to the point that the President just approved its extension to high school grants). This is perhaps the program most visibly pro-poor, and it is working; but infrastructure spending, which has been reaching new heights, is not delivering improvement. The government is spending on transportation infrastructure, specifically, with the aim of connecting the poor in rural areas to jobs in the city and easing the movement of goods from the provinces to urban consumers - but too many factors are delaying these projects even from procurement, that we are still waiting for roads and rails that will take the nation's growth to its people.
Those, on the expenditure side. With regard to taxes, the Philippines has improved its revenues from better collection, as part of Aquino's "matuwid na daan" theme. New taxes have as well been introduced, most notably the higher sin taxes that hiked prices of alcohol and cigarettes (prior to the law, the Philippines sold the lowest-priced cigarettes in Southeast Asia).
The country's fiscal policy looks good, even as it pushes harder for inclusive growth. I believe the challenge to this country is truly governance - for agencies in transportation and public works to step up and use government money to build infrastructure that will benefit the poor, for agencies in internal revenue and customs to beef up their collection efforts, and for policymakers, to evaluate taxes and projects and ensure that the Philippines' growth reaches the Filipinos.