(First of 2 Parts)

Question: “What do you see as the biggest issues for the UN over the next decade?”

Former UN SecGen. Kofi Annan: “A world in which extreme poverty and immense wealth live side by side is simply not sustainable. We’re dealing with issues – crime, nuclear weapons, diseases – that no country can handle alone... We’re falling back on the old habits of protecting our national interest.” (Time, October 12, 2009)

Over the years, since 2004, this column has participated in the study of global human development as collated, integrated, analyzed and reported by the United Nations, in particular its lead agency the UN Development Programme. This year’s UNDP report (HDR 2009) launched last 05 October 2009 simultaneously in Bangkok and New Delhi, is based on data gathered in 2007 from national offices, UN/international agencies, and on-site field reports. However, it does not yet cover the impacts of the global recession that started in the US in September 2008.

The most significant finding of the UN in its HDR 2009 is that Philippine Human Development since the past twelve years continues to decline.

Significant decline for the Philippines

The HDR 2007/2008 showed our country at rank 90 among 177 rated, or a showing of being at 51 percent (already at the lower half). While still within the “medium human development level,” the HDR 2009 shows the Philippines at rank 105 among 185, or a showing of 57 percent (going down in the lower half), which is a big negative change. In 1997, we ranked 77 or well within the upper half (46 percent) with an improving trend. But by 2000, our HDI started to deteriorate.

Looking at the comparatives in another way, the following were on top of the Philippines in the 2009 report: Malaysia (66), Thailand (82), China (92), Samoa (94), Tonga (99), and Algeria (104); while just below us were El Salvador (106), Fiji (108), Indonesia (111), and Vietnam (116).

Clearly, the Philippine rankings for over the last decade represent a downward trend which only integrated forward planning, concerted political will at all levels, and collective people’s effort can correct – and hopefully, reverse in the next few years.

So, are Filipinos satisfied with being lumped with the likes of Samoa, Tonga, and Fiji which are small Pacific nations (with due respect to them because they are just as “sovereign” as the huge, industrialized US)? Are we to be relegated to the bush leagues in the community of nations – whereas we used to be looked up to as the model for island-nations in terms of our representative democracy, English proficiency, inter-faith culture, and fierce struggle for independent nationhood?

The answer is: Surely NOT. Ask any young university student if given the facts and the same answer will be given.

On the other hand, the Philippines has demonstrated better performance than other nations in gender-related development where we ranked 40 out of 155 countries (26 percent), and in gender empowerment with rank 59 out of 106 (56 percent).

Valuable tool for leaders/decision-makers

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a valuable tool for national leaders and decision-makers to determine the progress (or lack of it) any country achieves during a given year. More than just the national ranking, however, the truly significant performance indicator is the trend over the years that a country attains.

Whom shall we vote for nationally and locally in 2010? Those who think only of the next 6 years (Presidents, Vice Presidents, Senators) or 3 years (Congressmen, Governors, Board Members, Mayors, Councilors)? Obviously not. As voters, we must elect into office those who can visualize
and act upon our problems from a generational point of view. Let us vote for those who can foresee
and actualize a better future for Filipinos in terms of a higher quality of life 25 years from now.

According to Dr. Arsenio Balisacan, former President of the Philippine Human Development Network, the HDI is the summary of a country’s progress in human development measured by three basic dimensions:
* A long and healthy life – determined by life expectancy at birth and relatively good health throughout.
* Access to knowledge – according to adult literacy and combined gross enrollment in education, particularly in the primary grades and high school.
* Decent standard of living – indicated by GDP per capita parity purchasing power and the services that such PPP could buy in-country.

Human mobility and overseas workers This year’s HDR 2009 focuses on “Overcoming Barriers: Human Mobility and Development.” Most timely, indeed, is the global issue of the movement of masses of people from the developing and underdeveloped countries to the wealthier nations where, presumably, better opportunities exist for jobs with higher outcomes. Likewise significant is the transfer within countries, rich and poor, from the rural areas to the urban centers (internal migration) in search of more effective services – in particular health, education, housing, transportation, communications and social mobility.

In previous years, equally important world problems were highlighted by the UNDP: HDR 2006 “Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis” and HDR 2007/2008 “Tackling Climate Change: Human Solidarity In A Divided World.”

Revealed by the factual, data-based HDR 2009 report were the following realities:
* Most people who move do so within the borders of their own country. Among international movers, only 2/5 move from developing to developed countries.
* There are huge variations in the circumstances surrounding human development. The poorest often cannot move at all, and when they do so, it is under uncertain and dangerous conditions.
* Movers can end up worse off. This is the common outcome in human trafficking.
* The direction of movements has changed: More now go to developed countries than in the past. Unfortunately, policy barriers remain high and have been tightened in many countries.
* Empirical studies show that most migrant workers experience significant income gains. Most numerous of these come from the poorest countries.

Beyond income, other gains in human development HDR 2009 reports that while migration can help development, it is not a substitute. Financial remittances boost incomes of households at home, and can help reduce poverty. Human movement often leads to transformative flows of ideas and values. Despite social concerns, most studies find positive aggregate effects.

For the Philippines, because of the landmark “Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995” (R.A. 8042) and the efforts of various advocacy groups, the skills of numerous OFWs have been upgraded under various forms of the mandated reintegration system.

In general, the global recession has cut demand for migrant workers and hit key destination places and sectors hardest. However, as the recovery ensues, underlying long-run trends will tend to dominate in favor of international migration.

According to Dr. Edita Tan of the UP School of Economics who did a summary of HDR 2009: “The world distribution of opportunities is extremely unequal, but this inequality is a key driver of human movement. Being able to choose where to live as a key element of human freedom is affected by broader measures of well-being such as education, health and empowerment. Politically feasible reforms have to do with access and treatment that are oriented towards helping those who are most disadvantaged and have the most to gain.”

Core package of reforms

To mitigate the social costs of migration and ensure mutual benefits for both the originating country and the recipient, a core set of necessary reforms must be put in place and/or agreed upon in an international covenant, as follows:

* Liberalize regular channels that enable people with low skills to work abroad.
* Ensure basic rights for migrants.
* Reduce migration transaction costs.
* Improve outcomes for migrants and destination communities.
* Make possible benefits from internal mobility.
* Include mobility as an integral part of development strategies. The following HDR findings provide the basis for necessary reforms to be undertaken:
* Mobility has the potential to enhance human development among movers, stayers and the majority of those in destination places.
* However, outcomes can be adverse, indicating a scope for significant improvements in policies and institutions.
* Bold and committed leadership can make a huge difference in the lives of millions.

Challenge to presidentiables

Can we Filipinos, under the leadership of a new president, improve or at least begin to improve, our UNDP ratings in the future? Of course, we can. Kaya natin ito!

Can we also improve our rankings in reducing corruption, upgrade human rights records, and innovate viable strategies for environmental protection? Of course, we can, too. Kaya din natin ito!

Abangan next Sunday – Part 2, more on Philippine Sustainable Development!

Please send any comments to fvr@rpdev.org. Copies of articles are available at www.rpdev.org.