I. II. III. IV. V.

Sources of Demographic Data Theories of Population Philippine Population Characteristic of Philippine Population Variables of Philippine Population a. Fertility b. Mortality c. Migration

VI.

Implication of Philippine Population Growth

GROUP 3 Members: Maria Carol Bernardo Danilyn R. Manalili Patricia Mendoza Lea Fe V. Pitogo Rodan Hernandez Pearlyn N. Buencido

Public Administration 12

Date of Report: November 26, 2010 Demography is the statistical study of human populations. It can be a very general science that can be applied to any kind of dynamic human population, that

is, one that changes over time or space. It encompasses the study of the size, structure and distribution of these populations, and spatial and/or temporal changes in them in response to birth, migration, aging and death.

VI.

Implication of Philippine Population Growth

The Philippine population in the early 1990s continued to grow at a rapid, although somewhat reduced rate from that which had prevailed in the preceding decades. In 1990 the Philippine population was more than 66 million, up from 48 million in 1980. This figure represents an annual growth rate of 2.5 percent, down from 2.6 percent in 1980 and from more than 3 percent in the 1960s. Even at the lower growth rate, the Philippine population will increase to an estimated 77 million by the year 2000 and will double every twenty-nine years into the next century. Moreover, in 1990 the population was still a youthful one, with 57 percent under the age of twenty. The birth rate in early 1991 was 29 per 1,000, and the death rate was 7 per 1,000. The infant mortality rate was 48 deaths per 1,000 live births. Population density increased from 160 per square kilometer in 1980 to 220 in 1990. The rapid population growth and the size of the younger population has required the Philippines to double the amount of housing, schools, and health facilities every twenty-nine years just to maintain a constant level.

Population and Labor Force The Philippines economy is unique in East Asia for having a large service sector and private consumption comprising around three quarters of the economy. The manufacturing sector is comparatively small and public and private investment is very low. Unemployment and underemployment continue to remain high. The prospect of securing a well-paying job is beyond the reach of many, especially young adults under the age of 25 that comprise about half of the unemployed. Under these conditions, many Filipinos migrate overseas to secure better paying employment. With a good command of the English language they are attractive in the global labour market. It is estimated that 9 to 11 million Filipinos are currently working overseas. Remittances from these overseas workers help drive the consumption-fuelled Philippines economy and accounted for about 10 per cent of the countrys GDP in 2009. Overseas remittances play an important macro-economy stabilizing role, but their pro-poor dimensions are questionable. Overseas remittances are disproportionately important components of middle- and highincome households; poorer households have little access to them.

In response to the global recession, the Government of the Philippines implemented an Economic Resiliency Package in 2009 to stimulate the economy. The government is running a large fiscal deficit of 3.5 per cent of GDP in 2010, and combined with the 2009 deficit, is the largest fiscal easing by the government in over two decades. Restoring the budget to a more sustainable footing will be challenging as the governments revenue base has declined in recent years and now comprises only 13 per cent of GDP, well below most East Asian countries. Reforming the tax system so the government has sufficient revenue to fund its priority development programs in education, health and transport is one of the most pressing issues facing the government. Long-standing binding constraints, such as an inward-looking economy and low levels of investment, as well as an eroding human capital base, suggest a more moderate growth outlook for the Philippines compared to its East Asian neighbors.

Population and Poverty Incidence Poverty is a significant problem, and in combination with high income inequality, it poses a serious threat to stability in the Philippines. The proportion of the population living below US$1.25 a day in 2006 was 23 per cent or around 20 million people. At the same time, about 44 per cent or over 40 million Filipinos were living on less than US$2 a day. While the Philippines was able to reduce poverty incidence from as high as 30 per cent in the early 1990s, the actual number of people living in poverty has increased over the last two decades. The global food and fuel price crises in 2007 and 2008, and the global economic crisis that followed, are estimated to have pushed even more people into poverty. Economic growth in the Philippines has been unable to lift many of the rural poor out of poverty who traditionally rely on the agricultural sector for employment and typically have less access to basic services, lower levels of education and larger families to support. Even during periods of stronger economic growth, such as 20042008, poverty continued to rise. Various factors have contributed to the lack of progress on poverty reduction in the Philippines. Some of these are: 1. High population growth, which averaged 2 per cent annually over the past decade, and places additional strain on the cost of household living and demand for basic services 2. Income inequality, which increased in the 1990s and remains relatively highthe poorest 20 per cent of the population accounting for only 5 per cent of total income or consumption. 3. Inability of the government to provide sufficient basic services, especially to people in poorer remote regions 4. Vulnerability of poorer communities to natural disasters and civil unrest which adversely affects livelihoods.

Population and Housing

The housing assistance to socialized housing or programs that catered to the bottom 30% represents only about 25% to 30% of the NSP program total accomplishments Moreover, these strategies have several limitations: first, the CMP while targeting the slums communities have not been brought to scale due to rising cost of land in urban areas, the limited availability of land in the cities and the lack of government funds for the program. Overtime, some communities have become overcrowded and depressed because the communities are unable to provide for themselves the infrastructure for site development. Second, Presidential Land Proclamations are constrained by several bureaucratic legalities that prevent the utilization of proclaimed lands for settlement in addition to the absence of financing scheme to development these lands for the poor. Third, the resettlement housing sites of the NHA are often in areas far from the livelihood or place of work of beneficiaries. Working household member have to rent a place in the city on work days leaving their family in the resettlement site while economic opportunities for women are limited due to lack of livelihood opportunities in these areas. The economic and social costs are too high in off-city resettlement. The distant relocation weakens family structure as the working member lives and rent a place in the city on work days and stays with the family only on weekends. On the part of government, resettlement projects are highly subsidized and local governments who are recipient of these communities are highly dependent on government for both logistic and fund support. Fourth, the housing loan facility through the HDMF favors those who are employed in the formal sector and limits access of the poor who are mostly engage in the informal sector. Moreover, the classification of socialized housing under the program is based on loan amount rather the housing value thus it is possible that those loans classified as socialized were actually provided to non-poor households. Government approach to housing has always been client-based targeting specific beneficiaries and measuring accomplishments in terms of individual housing assistance thus concerns about the community and the environment of the poor have not really been translated into investment programs. The government has also failed to leverage its resources to harness greater private sector participation and to provide for sustainability in housing programs for the poor.

Population and Growth of Slums In 2006, 7% of the urban population lived in slums. The proportion is higher in Metro Manila where 1 of every 10 persons lived in slums. Moreover, the growth of population in slums has been very rapid at an average annual rate of about 4% in urban areas and large metropolitan centers. In Metro Manila slum population grew at an annual rate of 11% between 2000 and 2006. Assuming no change in town planning and housing policy in the country, projection for 2020 shows that about 4.0 million people will live in slums and by 2050, over 14 million people will be living in slums. This will represent about one third of population in large towns and cities and more than half of population in Metro Manila.

Population and Health Physical and social empowerment was promoted in the inter-related subsections of health, nutrition, and population Development. Towards this end-goal, direct and indirect interventions have been achieved through program expansion, greater outreach to clientele, more emphasis on preventive measures, and advocacy. Accomplishments in basic health services, disease prevention and health promotion consisted in the quantitative gains of the principal programs and projects, most which have been started in previous years. These include: Expanded Program on Immunization; Maternal Care and Breast Feeding Program; Prevention of Blindness Program; Environmental Health Service; National Rabies Control Program; National TB Control Program; National AIDS-STD Prevention and Control Program; Malaria Control Service; Hospital Services; National Dengue Prevention and Control Program; National Filariasis Control Program; and Leprosy Elimination and Special Action Project. The year 1996 saw the completion and approval of the National Health Plan, 19952000. This plan is the country's perspective plan for health which provides the general directions and broad strategies for an effective and efficient system. Other notable accomplishments in the area of policy Development during the year are the continued facilitation in the implementation of the Magna Carta for public health workers, capability building for devolved LGU health personnel, and the publication of the 1995 Field Health Information System statistics. Moreover, the government has formulated the implementing rules and regulations for R.A. 8203 "Special Law on Counterfeit Drugs" and issued the 1996 edition of the Philippine National Drug Policy. The latter aims to rationalize drug procurement, distribution and use. The hallmarks of the nutrition sub sector accomplishments are more quantitative and qualitative in terms of outreach and better program implementation in pursuit of the Philippine Plan of Action for Nutrition (PPAN). Accomplishment in this subsector counted on the inputs of concerned agencies like the DOH and the NNC. The government launched the Health Lifestyle and Health Diet Promotion (IWAS SAKIT DIET) project as a vigorous health promotion and disease prevention endeavor. A corollary effort at the national level which springs from PPAN implementation continued to focus on addressing micronutrient (Vitamin A, iodine, and iron) deficiency and protein-energy malnutrition. However, more activities were geared toward food fortification with the private sector playing a lead role. The DOH, in coordination with Helen Keller International, through its Child Growth Project focused on the establishment of weighing posts as a satellite of the baranggay health stations. The weighing post also serves as a post for nutrition counseling depending on the observed changed in the child's weight and weight status.

Population and Water Supply Increasing population size requires increased water supply and waste disposal systems. The Philippines has inadequate supply of water for home and industrial consumption. The increasing population demands an increase in the quantity and quality of water supply. The NSO reported that the only 40 percent of the country urban population have potable water supply and that there is the need to reach six million people in the provincial areas. Studies revealed that many Filipinos depend on the traditional methods of getting water; most of the households get water from pipe wells, but many also get from dug wells, spring, rivers, and streams, rain and peddlers. Population and Waste Disposal About 35% to 58% of the organic pollution of our waters comes from domestic sources both solid waste and sanitation. The inadequate solid waste management program contributes to a very serious water pollution problem in cities. It is estimated that in the urban areas, waste generation is around half a kilo (0.5kg) per person per day. In Metro Manila, about 7,000 tons of solid wastes are generated on a daily basis in 2008. Only about 700 tons per day are recycled or composted while the balance of around 6,000 tons per day are either hauled to the citys dump sites, dumped into creeks, canals and rivers, burned or left on streets. Leachate from solid waste contaminate the soil and the waters, both groundwater and surface waters. Moreover, the absence of sewerage systems in most parts of the country adds to pollution in water. Household waste is disposed through septic tanks, many of which are improperly designed, constructed (many are bottomless) and hardly maintained.10In Metro Manila only about 15% of the sewage generated is treated. All other pollutants are drained into rivers. In 1996, only 51% of classified rivers still met the water quality standards and 16 of our rivers are biologically dead during the dry months. In Metro Manila, all four water bodies in the metropolis Pasig-Marikina, Navotas-Malabon-Tullaban-Tenejeros, Manila Bay, and Laguna Lake are biologically dead