FIRST AND FOREMOST, take this with a grain of salt. During a Senate briefing last August 15, National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) Secretary Arsenio Balisacan declared that Filipinos who spend more than 64 pesos a day for three meals were not “food poor.” Is this delusion, detachment, or both?
Naturally, the original assertion was met with backlash especially from legislators and citizens. However, NEDA would soon clarify that the 64 pesos per day, or 21 pesos per meal, was not meant to prescribe how much a person should spend on a meal but rather to “measure the effectiveness of the government’s policies and programs in addressing poverty.”
“In this economy, assuming that 64 pesos a day, or 21 pesos per meal, is a proper benchmark for determining whether someone is “food poor” reflects the detachment of institutions of development from the day-to-day realities of the average Filipino.”
Frankly, I take offense at how NEDA utilized the “food poverty” threshold to oversimplify the conditions of Filipinos, neglecting pivotal factors such as inflation and the rising standards that should have been considered in the metrics.
In a report by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), the annual inflation rate in July rose to 4.4%, a stark increase from the 3.7% recorded last month. The soaring prices of rice became one of the primary culprits, making up 1.6% of the overall inflation rate. Among other things, food inflation also climbed to 6.7% compared to 6.5% in June.
To put it simply, inflation is growing at an alarming rate, posing a strain on Filipinos with the advent of increasing costs in even the most necessities such as food and utilities. Adding insult to injury, the sector that was hit the most was that of poorer socioeconomic classes, recording a year-high 5.8% for the bottom 30% of income households.
Groups such as the iBON Foundation have also slammed NEDA’s underestimation of the food poverty threshold, deeming it an “unrealistic figure” given the “low ambition and standard” to approach the age-old problem of poverty. Yet, the PSA argues that the menu for the 64 pesos “food poverty” threshold was based on the cheapest or least cost.
And so, moving on to the million-dollar question: Saan aabot ang 21 pesos mo? A typical lunch in a karinderya will set you back at around Php 100. But if you want to buy and prepare that lunch for yourself, the price of protein alone (such as fish or chicken), will already exceed the forecasted amount.
Even then, no one will go around looking for the lowest possible costs of the cheapest food items, nor is it easily accessible to those in poorer households.
The numbers just really don’t add up, unless you’re one of the geniuses from PSA and NEDA who just so happens to be in another timeline completely.
In this economy, assuming that 64 pesos a day, or 21 pesos per meal, is a proper benchmark for determining whether someone is “food poor” reflects the detachment of institutions of development from the day-to-day realities of the average Filipino.
Indeed, an assessment of outdated models such as these is long overdue. If we want to prioritize the welfare of people in areas such as food security, we must first ensure that the frameworks to assess the pressing concerns such as poverty mirror that of our present truths.
Email me at thebedan_associateeditor@sanbeda.edu.ph