Commentary: COVID-19 reverses Philippines' decade of economic progress
The Philippines’ model of growth is built around the mobility of people, making it vulnerable to disease outbreak, says a government studies professor.
MANILA: In 2019, the Philippines was one of the fastest growing economies in the world. It finally shed its “sick man of Asia” reputation obtained during the economic collapse towards the end of the Ferdinand Marcos regime in the mid-1980s.
After decades of painstaking reform – not to mention paying back debts incurred under the dictatorship – the country’s economic renaissance took root in the decade prior to the pandemic.
Posting over 6 percent average annual growth between 2010 and 2019 (computed from the Philippine Statistics Authority data on GDP growth rates at constant 2018 prices), the Philippines was touted as the next Asian tiger economy.
That was prior to COVID-19.
The rude awakening from the pandemic was that a services- and remittances-led growth model doesn’t do too well in a global disease outbreak. The Philippines’ economic growth faltered in 2020 – entering negative territory for the first time since 1999 – and the country experienced one of the deepest contractions in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) that year.
And while the government forecasts a slight rebound in 2021, some analysts are concerned over an uncertain and weak recovery, due to the country’s protracted lockdown and inability to shift to a more efficient containment strategy.
The Philippines has relied instead on draconian mobility restrictions across large sections of the country’s key cities and growth hubs every time a COVID-19 surge threatens to overwhelm the country’s health system.
WHAT WENT WRONG?
How does one of the fastest growing economies in Asia falter? It would be too simplistic to blame this all on the pandemic.
First, the Philippines’ economic model itself appears more vulnerable to disease outbreak. It is built around the mobility of people, yet tourism, services, and remittances-fed growth are all vulnerable to pandemic-induced lockdowns and consumer confidence decline.
International travel plunged, tourism came to a grinding halt, and domestic lockdowns and mobility restrictions crippled the retail sector, restaurants, and hospitality industry.
Fortunately, the country’s business process outsourcing (BPO) sector is demonstrating some resilience – yet its main markets have been hit heavily by the pandemic, forcing the sector to rapidly upskill and adjust to emerging opportunities under the new normal.
Second, pandemic handling was also problematic. Lockdown is useful if it buys a country time to strengthen health systems and test-trace-treat systems. These are the building blocks of more efficient containment of the disease.
However, if a country fails to strengthen these systems, then it squanders the time that lockdown affords it. This seems to be the case for the Philippines, which made global headlines for implementing one of the world’s longest lockdowns during the pandemic, yet failed to flatten its COVID-19 curve.
At the time of writing, the Philippines is again headed for another hard lockdown and it is still trying to graduate to a more efficient containment strategy amidst rising concerns over the Delta variant which has spread across Southeast Asia.
It seems stuck with on-again, off-again lockdowns, which are severely damaging to the economy, and will likely create negative expectations for future COVID-19 surges.
If the Delta variant and other possible variants are near-term threats, then the lack of efficient containment can be expected to force the country back to draconian mobility restrictions as a last resort.
Meanwhile, only two months of social transfers (ayuda) were provided by the central government during 16 months of lockdown by mid-2021. All this puts more pressure on an already weary population reeling from deep recession, job displacement, and long-term risks on human development.
Low social transfers support in the midst of joblessness and rising hunger is also likely to weaken compliance with mobility restriction policies.
Third, the Philippines suffered from delays in its vaccination rollout which was initially hobbled by implementation and supply issues, and later affected by lingering vaccine hesitancy. These are all likely to delay recovery in the Philippines.
LESSONS FOR THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT
By now there are many clear lessons both from the Philippine experience and from emerging international best practices. In order to mount a more successful economic recovery, the Philippines must address the following key policy issues.
First, it must build a more efficient containment strategy particularly against the threat of possible new variants principally by strengthening the test-trace-treat system.
Based on lessons from other countries, test-trace-treat systems usually also involve comprehensive mass-testing strategies to better inform both the public and private sectors on the true state of infections among the population.
In addition, integrated mobility databases (not fragmented city-based ones) also capacitate more effective and timely tracing. This kind of detailed and timely data allows for government and the private sector to better coordinate on nuanced containment strategies that target areas and communities that need help due to outbreak risk.
And unlike a generalised lockdown, this targeted and data-informed strategy could allow other parts of the economy to remain more open than otherwise.
Second, the Philippine government must strengthen the sufficiency and transparency of direct social protection in order to give immediate relief to poor and low-income households already severely impacted by the mishandling of the pandemic.
This requires a rebalancing of the budget in favour of education, health, and social protection spending, in lieu of an over-emphasis on build-build-build infrastructure projects.
This is also an opportunity to enhance the social protection system to create a safety net and concurrent database that covers not just the poor but also the vulnerable low- and lower-middle- income population.
The chief concern here would be to introduce social protection innovations that prevent middle income Filipinos from sliding into poverty during a pandemic or other crisis.
Third, the Philippines must ramp-up vaccination to cover at least 70 percent of the population as soon as possible, and enlist the further support of the private sector and civil society in order to keep improving vaccine rollout.
An effective communications campaign needs to be launched to counteract vaccine hesitancy, building on trustworthy institutions (like academia, the Catholic Church, civil society and certain private sector partners) in order to better protect the population against the threat of Delta or another variant affecting the Philippines.
It will also help if parts of government could stop the politically-motivated fearmongering on vaccines, as had occurred with the dengue fever vaccine, Dengvaxia, which continues to sow doubts and fears among parts of the population.
Fourth, the government should create a build-back-better strategy anchored on universal and inclusive healthcare. Among other things, such a strategy should acknowledge the critically important role of the private sector and civil society in pandemic response and healthcare sector cooperation.
It should also underpin pandemic response around lasting investments in institutions and technology that enhance contact tracing (e-platforms), testing (labs), and universal healthcare with lower out-of-pocket costs and higher inclusivity. This requires a more inclusive, well-funded, and better-governed health insurance system.
As much of ASEAN reels from the spread of the Delta variant, it is critical that the Philippines takes these steps to help allay concerns over the country’s preparedness to handle new variants emerging, while also recalibrating expectations in favour of resuscitating its economy.
Only then can the Philippines avoid becoming the sick man of Asia again, and return to the rapid and steady growth of the pre-pandemic decade.
Ronald U Mendoza is Dean and Professor at Ateneo School of Government, Ateneo de Manila University, This commentary first appeared on Brookings’ blog, Order From Chaos.