2017年-世界发展银行全球_Promoting_Inclusive_Growth_by_Creating_Opportunities_for_the_Urban_Poor___Philippines_Urbanization_Review_Policy_Notes_28页_3mb

Summary of Promoting Inclusive Growth by Creating Opportunities for the Urban Poor

Core Content

This document outlines the challenges of urbanization in the Philippines, particularly its impact on the urban poor, and emphasizes the need for inclusive urban development. It highlights the critical importance of addressing economic, spatial, and social dimensions of inclusion to ensure that urbanization benefits all segments of the population, not just the affluent.

Main Challenges and Key Issues

1. Urbanization and Poverty in the Philippines

• Urbanization Trends: By 2050, 84% of the population is projected to live in cities, with cities generating 70% of the country's GDP.
• Poverty Disparities: Despite urban poverty incidence being lower than the national average (12.5% vs. 25.2%), poverty remains deeply entrenched in urban areas.
• Informal Settlements: The number of informal settlers has grown from 4.1% to 5.4% of the urban population between 2003 and 2012. In Metro Manila alone, 1.3 million people live in informal settlements, which is 11% of the region's population.
• Vulnerability: Many informal settlers are not income poor but are vulnerable to external shocks due to unstable income and lack of financial protection.

2. Economic Exclusion

• Employment Patterns:
  • 75% of Filipino workers are informally employed, with two-thirds of urban jobs being informal.
  • Urban poor are predominantly engaged in low-wage, low-productivity informal service jobs.
• Education and Skills:
  • Low levels of education are strongly correlated with urban poverty. 35% of urban poor have household heads with less than primary education.
  • Only 67.7% of ISFs in Metro Manila have less than secondary education, limiting their job opportunities.
• Wage Disparities:
  • The average daily wage of the urban poor is less than half of that of the urban non-poor.
  • Informal wage workers earn significantly less than formal workers and face higher risks of income instability.
• Underemployment:
  • Underemployment rates are higher among the urban poor (29%) than the urban non-poor (14.7%).
  • In NCR, the underemployment rate for the urban poor is 37%, almost three times that of the urban non-poor.
• Livelihood Interventions:
  • Micro-enterprise development programs have been ineffective due to lack of market analysis, business skills, and personal characteristics necessary for success.
  • Many livelihood programs focus on what ISFs want rather than what the market demands, leading to skill mismatches.

3. Spatial Exclusion

• Informal Settlements:
  • Informal settlements are concentrated in Metro Manila, with Quezon City having the largest share (34%).
  • These settlements are characterized by inadequate access to land, housing, and basic services.
• Housing Crisis:
  • Housing shortages persist despite allocated land for residential use.
  • HUDCC estimates that 6.3 million households will need housing by 2017, and the private sector estimates 12.5 million units by 2030.
  • Only 0.1% of GDP has been allocated to the housing sector between 2000 and 2014, making public spending on housing the lowest in Asia.
• Resettlement Issues:
  • Off-city resettlement has often been implemented against the wishes of ISFs, leading to socio-economic setbacks.
  • A five-year study showed that off-city resettled ISFs experienced a 50% income gap compared to those who stayed in-city.
  • The SHFC's Community Mortgage Program (CMP) has limited reach and often results in blighted sites due to lack of financial capacity for development.
• Access to Basic Services:
  • Water: 48% of ISFs get water from vendors, 11% from neighbors, and 3% share connections. Connection fees are prohibitively high, and water from informal providers is often unregulated and expensive.
  • Sanitation: While access is reported to be high (93%), facilities are often improperly designed and maintained, leading to water contamination and health risks.
  • Electricity: High tariffs force many ISFs to use shared or illegal connections. 46% have shared connections, which are more costly.
  • Solid Waste Management: Poor waste management leads to health issues and contributes to flooding.

4. Social Exclusion

• Discrimination and Marginalization: ISFs are often viewed as "problems" and excluded from decision-making processes.
• Crime and Violence: ISFs face higher rates of crime and violence compared to other urban populations.
• Social Integration: They are seldom integrated into broader communities and face social stigma.

Key Recommendations

• Integrated Approach: Policies must address all three dimensions of inclusion (economic, spatial, and social) simultaneously.
• Affordable Housing: Expand social housing programs with inclusive land use planning, disaster resilience, and sustainable development.
• Market-Driven Livelihoods: Improve livelihood interventions by aligning them with market needs and ensuring sound financial and skill support.
• Infrastructure Development: Invest in clean water, sanitation, and electricity access to improve living conditions and reduce health risks.
• Governance Reforms: Strengthen local governance and provide incentives for LGUs to take a proactive role in social housing and urban development.

Conclusion

Inclusive urbanization is essential for the Philippines to harness the potential of urban growth and reduce poverty. The challenges faced by the urban poor, particularly in informal settlements, require coordinated, multi-dimensional strategies that address economic opportunities, spatial access, and social inclusion. Without such efforts, the urban poor will continue to be marginalized, limiting the overall competitiveness and growth of cities.