mongster's nest

- disturbing fantasies, traumatic verses, definitely mongrel thoughts

Is the Philippines overpopulated?

Join the discussion in the Yehey! message boards: Pardon for Estrada? ZTE scandal.

The Philippines is the 14th most populous country in the world and third in the Southeast Asian region. Young dependents comprise 34 percent of the population, 62 percent belong to the working-age group and 4 percent are categorized as elderly dependents. Scholars have estimated that the large youth population will continue until the year 2040, but the working-age population and the number of senior citizens will increase much faster.

The Philippines has one of the fastest-growing populations in the world. During the 1980s, the Philippines and Thailand had the same population level of around 55 million. Today, Thailand has 60 million while the Philippines has 88 million. A European diplomat recently noted that 200 years ago there were more Scots (1.7 million) than there were Filipinos (1.6 million). Today, Scotland has a population of only 5 million.

Many economists insist that a high population growth results in lower per capita income and higher poverty incidence. High fertility rates result in poor education access and quality, malnutrition, environmental degradation, resource depletion, a decrease in household resources, limited economic opportunities for women, an increase in maternal and child mortality and abortion rates. In short, as family size increases, there is reduction in investment in human capital.

But there are groups led by the Catholic Church which maintain that a high population growth is not a problem. There is even a respected politician who once asserted that 88 million Filipinos could live in the small island of Bohol. There are scholars who view the young population of the Philippines as the most valuable resource of the country. They remind the public how many governments of developed countries are encouraging their citizens to bear many children to offset the negative consequences of an aging population.

They assert that poverty is not caused by overpopulation. They blame corruption in society, especially in government, which deprives the poor of vital social services. That the income share of the richest 10 percent of the population is more than 20 times the income of the poorest 10 percent proves that inequality, not overpopulation, is the principal problem of the country.

The population policies of the government claim to promote responsible parenthood, respect for life, birth spacing and informed choice. But there is still no comprehensive and well-defined population management program in the country. Politicians are afraid to antagonize the Catholic Church which rejects all artificial methods of family planning. There are many local government officials who removed funding support for reproductive health services, which denied the people their right to choose the appropriate family planning method for their families.

Scholars are appealing to the Catholic Church hierarchy and other religious groups "to take a more tolerant and humane position on the need for a state-supported population policy backed by a responsive family planning program."

Dr. Ernesto M. Pernia, an economist, has a provocative comment on the link between religion and economic growth. He said that religion in terms of belief in afterlife and fear of hell is good for economic growth while mere church attendance has the opposite effect. He compares the Philippines and the Catholic-dominated Latin American societies with East Asian Buddhist countries. He noted that the wealth, economic performance, political instability, boom-and-bust cycles and lavish spending on fiestas in the Philippines and Latin American countries are strikingly similar. Pernia thinks the Philippines is more suited to belong to Latin America than East Asia.

The Philippines' lower economic standing than Latin American countries seems to be the only notable difference. Pernia asks a daring question: Could it be that in the Philippines the Catholic Church hierarchy has been overly conservative and intolerant, while those in Latin American countries are more liberal and tolerant, with respect to population policy and family planning programs?

Politicians should listen to the sentiments of the people rather than blindly obeying the sermons of priests. Recent surveys reveal that more than 90 percent of the population thinks that ability to control fertility and plan a family is important while 89 percent thinks that government should provide budgetary support for modern methods of family planning including the pill, IUD, condoms, tubal ligation and vasectomy.

It is correct to emphasize that the economic problems of the Philippines are not rooted in rapid population growth alone. We can cite corruption, inequity and bad economic policies as major factors why the country has not progressed. But we cannot also deny the link between population and poverty. Slowing down population growth will enable the country to invest more in human capital.

Managing population should not be equated with abortion as some religious leaders claim. Promoting reproductive health rights is a social justice issue. Respecting the family size preference and family planning method of couples affirm the human rights of women.

Related entry: dating tinamaang daan

posted by: mongpalatino at September 25, 2007 22:50 | link | comments (5) |
economy

Comments:

#1  26 September 2007 - 15:27

 

i agree. population size (or religion, for that matter) is not the sole reason for poverty. but we cannot dismiss its impact on development. we need a balance between faith and reason.

Anonymous

#2  27 September 2007 - 06:28

 

Mong is correct in being concerned about the rate of population growth, and this is one issue where the Catholic Church is negligent, being the primary cause of much poverty, suffering, and environmental harm.

IMHO all countries should be following China's lead - at least giving strong incentives to have no more than two children. The short-term economic arguments - such as needing a growing population to fund retirement pensions - are not the key issue. Instead look long term, how will the Philippines look with 300 million residents? Will fishermen be able to catch enough fish? Can you grow enough food?

Global oil production is peaking. I'm a California native and fear that this will impact the USA more than it does the Philippines. But its questionable whether Manila will be able to keep the electricity on too.

You might find the essays at www.dieoff.org and info at www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net interesting.

Anonymous

#3  27 September 2007 - 09:44

 

The problem with the Catholic Church's position is that it's based on the idea that sex is wrong and should only be done within marriage and for procreation. It denies the basic biological nature of humans and tries to justify this by saying "we need the human resources" or whatever BS their economists come up with. But the fact remains that the Church's "no contraception" rule was made WITHOUT considering national development, except as an afterthought.

missingpoints

#4  25 October 2007 - 12:03

 

hello mong musta ka na... long time no communication with textpower. good luck and godbless always.

Anonymous

#5  31 December 2008 - 23:31

 

You seem ready to examine all the ideas you come across, which is good.

A point I wanted to make is that environmental degradation may be increased by development-especially when it does not face many regulations. Toxic chemicals that are dumped in rivers often come from factories embraced as signs of development.

Thus by saying you need fewer people in order to build more factories you may not realize it but you could be arguing for speeding up environmental degradation rather than slowing it down.

Anonymous

Comments: