The second series of this column discussed social exclusion and participatory approaches to poverty. This final series delves into the appropriate strategy for addressing poverty, such as discussing the right approach and culminating in a concluding section.
Right Approach
The right approach, known as right-based, was used to guide government agencies to make policies on poverty reduction and to measure the level of poverty in every region. The aims of this approach are to assess and strengthen the process, ensure proper access to information from the stakeholders, measure the level of participation of the target beneficiaries, and lastly, obtain access to justice.
There are 22 rights stipulated in the 1987 Philippine Constitution; however, those rights aim to protect individuals from the inapt actions of the state. It means that it serves to harmoniously establish the relationship between the individual and state by limiting the lawful power of the government. On the contrary, those rights are pure political rights, not addressing the social, cultural, economic, and spiritual rights of the individual.
ActionAid, an international human rights organization, lays down a framework for how the state may address poverty based on the right approach. Basically, the state should provide the right to elevate the standard of living of individuals by providing adequate food, clothing, housing, medical care, social services, as well as civil and political freedoms. In such a way, it is mandatory for any individual to have access to education, health services, food, decent shelter, security, the freedom to express their sentiments, and to avoid any form of indiscrimination. Once those rights are denied, the state is liable.
Let us see the situation of the individual Filipino according to those rights. According to the PulseAsia survey, it reveals that the Marcos administration has a poor rating for addressing poverty at 51%, which is second to the highest disapproval rating. Also, the administration has been very poor at addressing the high cost of goods and services. Those data show that this current administration is artificially addressing poverty according to their political agenda. There has been no suitable program for addressing poverty since PBBM assumed leadership in July 2022.
Hereunder are the key effort programs that were implemented by the Marcos administration: 1) the conditional cash transfer program known as Pantawid Pamilya Pilipino (4Ps); 2) DSWD immediate assistance to individuals facing crisis situations; and 3) a program that provides livelihood opportunities for displaced and disadvantaged workers known as Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers (TUPAD); 4) free college education for eligible students in state universities and colleges; and 5) financial cash assistance to vulnerable individuals and families. These programs are insufficient to reduce poverty in the country because they are used by the majority of politicians on their behalf. In such a way, the poverty reduction program is a political agenda by the politicians, not a state agenda, to help people living in poverty. So, poverty is intact for us and will become worse until the end of this administration. And the rights of individuals and families living in poverty are denied.
Concluding Statement
In the previous two series, I discussed the following approaches: monetary, capability, social exclusion, and participatory. Those approaches are utilized by various agencies, both locally and internationally. For example, the World Bank used the monetary approach, while capability, social exclusion, and participatory were commonly used by state agencies as well as non-government organizations at the local and international levels.
Dealing with the right approach is quite different because it is more holistic in nature. Indeed, the right approach is appropriate for us because it increases critical awareness and consciousness of the poor, addresses the needs and rights of the people, increases the participation and actions of the poor, focuses on the action of politicians to act, and makes the state a responsible actor in dealing with poverty.
Consequently, those approaches are appropriate too, aside from the right-based approach, but they vary according to the context and needs of the poor. To end this series, I remembered that when I entered the Union Theological Seminary in Dasmarinas City (Cavite), we solemnly recited the passage in the Bible found in the gospel of Luke 4:18–19: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. because he has anointed me, to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives, and recovery of sight for the blind, to set free those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
Jesus read the passage from the Book of Isaiah when he entered the synagogue. Then he proclaimed that the scripture had been fulfilled upon hearing it. As a result, he was rejected from his hometown. Definitely, when we tell the truth about poverty, we are ejected by the people or by the state. Then, when we ask why there is poverty, the state accuses us of being radical and/or against the government. Actually, the cause of poverty is all of us. If we never share our resources with others, then the number of people living in poverty will increase. Mother Theresa said that poverty is not created by God; it is created by you and me when we don’t share what we have. I hope that everybody understands the root cause of poverty. It was not created by God; it was created by us. So, all of us are liable.
Prayer
Gracious God, the creator of heaven and earth, hears our ironies and agonies from the hands of powerful. Please outpour Your Spirit upon us to become able stewards who share what we have with others and become servants at all times.
May your bountiful blessing be with us now and forever. Amen.
References:
- ActionAid (2008). Human Rights-Based Approaches to Poverty Eradication and Development. Somerset, UK: ActionAid Publication, June 2008.
- OXFAM Philippines (https://philippines.oxfam.org)
- PulseAsia, July 14, 2024. (https://pulseasia.ph/pulse-asia-3-in-4-filipinos-dissatisfied-with-how-marcos-govt-addresses-inflation)
- World Bank (https://www.worldbank.org/en/home0
Prof. Ruel D. Garcia is a faculty member of La Consolacion College Manila as well as the Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal on Culture, History, and Religion (IJCHR.paschr.ph).
