poverty in pandemic philippines essay

How COVID-19 impacted vulnerable communities in the Philippines

Ditte fallesen.

When people around the world started to bear the brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic in mid-2020, the World Bank launched COVID-19 surveys to monitor the social and economic impacts of the pandemic on communities.   In the Philippines, the community survey conducted in collaboration with the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), provided important insights on how best to deliver pandemic response and recovery programs aimed at supporting the poorest and most vulnerable rural communities. Respondents included community volunteers and barangay (village) officials from some of the poorest communities identified through the country’s existing national community-driven development project . 

In August 2020, the first round of the community survey had 180 respondents representing 101 barangays. The second round in April 2021 had 200 respondents from 135 barangays across the three main group of islands—Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao.  

Using a standard questionnaire developed to capture the community’s socio-economic conditions, respondents were asked to share their views on the situation in their communities. These results reflect the general observations of community leaders based on their perception and knowledge of their respective communities.  

Economic impact on communities  

COVID-19 has taken a heavy toll on rural livelihoods. Loss of income and job opportunities were overarching challenges in poor communities in the Philippines.     Disaster-prone communities experienced more difficulties in coping with COVID-19 restrictions and its severe economic impact. Results show the most pressing problems before and during COVID-19 were: 

• Lack of income opportunities and reduction of pay were pre-existing challenges but had worsened significantly due to the pandemic.  
• During the pandemic, communities reported continued insufficient food supply and health, sanitation, and nutrition issues.  

The economic impact of COVID-19 is particularly worrisome as the surveyed communities are already a subset of the poorest and most vulnerable communities in the Philippines. Following significant job and income losses, communities are at risk of further increases in poverty. 

In August 2020 , job losses were particularly severe in the construction sector (56%) and public transportation (52%) while cumulative job losses were seen among informal workers such as laundry women, hairdressers, and workers in small canteens; and in informal retail like “ sari-sari ” stores , street vendors, and markets. The farming sector also saw significant job losses reportedly in 70% of communities in formal agriculture and 61% in small-scale farming.  

The situation had somewhat improved by the second round of the survey in April 2021. The sector that saw the biggest improvements was retail, where reported incidence of job losses decreased by 13%. However, construction workers and public transport drivers continued to be most affected by job cuts (56% and 52% respectively). 

Social cohesion 

Seventy-four percent (74%) of communities did not observe any peace and order problems such as theft, crime, arguments, and community-level conflict because of COVID-19.  However, there was an increase in peace and order problems when the second round of the survey was carried out. This seemed to be mainly caused by loss of employment. While cases of COVID-related discrimination similarly increased, there was no increase in sexual harassment, rape, and domestic violence according to respondents. However, findings from an independent conflict monitoring system ( Conflict Alert ) covering a smaller area of the Philippines, the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao suggests there may be more vulnerable communities . The Conflict Alert data , based on police and media reports, reveals a significant increase in gender-based violence during the periods of strict COVID lockdown. 

Gender and women’s roles 

Half of the respondents found that women and men were equally affected by job and income losses, while 29% found that women were more affected. Women were also identified as one of the groups most in need of assistance because of COVID-19.  

Health and vaccine concerns 

In the Philippines, access to health care during the pandemic remained consistent, though a main challenge was the lack of medical supplies and PPEs, especially in the early phase. 

The survey finds that there was significant concern about vaccine safety (86%) and effectiveness (60%). Vaccine hesitancy was hampering the rollout of the vaccines in the country. Communities mainly trust doctors and health practitioners for information on vaccines. Though the respondents knew vaccines could prevent COVID-19, they were aware that health and risk mitigation protocols were still needed. While respondents generally found the government-issued rules and restrictions appropriate, they suggested that local governments should be more stringent and consistent in the enforcement of these health-related protocols. Vaccine hesitancy continues to be a challenge in the Philippines, and further analysis is being initiated to identify key incentives and constructive messaging. 

The results of the community survey, along with the firm and household surveys, were shared with the Philippine government and other stakeholders. Future rounds will strengthen the validity of results and will provide an opportunity for focusing on additional sub-themes, including gender and coping strategies, or new themes that emerge as relevant.  

The survey clearly highlights how poor and vulnerable rural communities are affected by the economic impacts of COVID-19. Going forward, we hope that the valuable insights into the situation and perceptions of the communities can help inform target policies as well as response and recovery programs.    

Learn more about the surveys monitoring COVID-19 impacts on families and firms in the Philippines: http://www.worldbank.org/philippines/covidmonitor  

Through additional financing for the Kalahi-CIDSS National Community Driven Development Project , the World Bank is supporting early recovery of rural poor communities from the pandemic. The Philippine government will undertake community-driven development projects that promote inclusive service provision and support economic recovery, such as cash-for-work programs and local economic development activities using the project’s Disaster Risk Operations Modality.  

• Philippines
• East Asia and Pacific
• COVID-19 (coronavirus)

Get updates from East Asia & Pacific on the Rise

Thank you for choosing to be part of the East Asia & Pacific on the Rise community!

Your subscription is now active. The latest blog posts and blog-related announcements will be delivered directly to your email inbox. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Senior Social Development Specialist

Join the Conversation

• Share on mail
• comments added

KEY FINDINGS Overcoming Poverty and Inequality in the Philippines: Past, Present, and Prospects for the Future

Download the Full Report

• The Philippines has made significant progress in reducing poverty, but income inequality has only recently begun to fall. Thanks to high growth rates and structural transformation, between 1985 and 2018 poverty fell by two-thirds. However, income inequality did not begin to decline until 2012. It is still high: the top 1 percent of earners together capture 17 percent of national income, with only 14 percent being shared by the bottom 50 percent.
• Several structural factors contribute to the persistence of inequality. The expansion of secondary education and mobility to better-paying jobs, citizen ownership of more assets and access to basic services, and government social assistance have helped reduce inequality since the mid-2000s. However, unequal opportunities, lack of access to tertiary education and a scarcity of skills, coupled with inequality in returns to college education, gendered social norms and childcare, and spatial gaps, sustain inequality.
• Inequality of opportunity limits the potential for upward mobility. While there has been considerable progress in expanding access to basic services such as electricity, safe drinking water, and school enrollment, large disparities limit the development of human capital. Inequality of opportunity and low intergenerational mobility waste human potential, resulting in a lack of innovation and a misallocation of human capital in the economy.
• While schooling is widely accessible, its quality and attainment vary by income group. Children from poorer households are less likely to be enrolled and, if they are, to reach age-appropriate grade levels. That means they are less likely to reach tertiary education, which severely constrains their earning potential and their prospects for upward mobility. With the relatively low share of workers with tertiary education, the premium for college education has remained high. Additionally, tertiary education tends to deliver much higher returns for rich than poor households, possibly due to differences in school quality or f ields of study and employment.
• COVID-19 partly reversed decades-long gains in reducing poverty and inequality. The pandemic halted economic growth momentum in 2020, and unemployment shot up in industries that require inperson work. In 2021, poverty rose to 18.1 percent despite large government assistance. The economy has begun to rebound but signs are emerging that the recovery will be uneven. Prolonged loss of income has taken a heavy toll on the poorest households. With food prices going up and a reliance on adverse coping strategies, among them eating less, there is a risk of serious consequences for the health and nutrition of children in vulnerable households.
• The shock from the COVID-19 pandemic led to a shift in the workforce to less productive sectors and occupations. Employment in wage work has notably decreased and employment in agriculture has risen. These trends have been concentrated among youth and the least educated, which suggests an uneven recovery and widening income inequality.
• The pandemic is likely to result in long-term scarring of human capital development. Over half of households estimate that their children learned from remote learning less than half what they would have learned from face-to-face schooling. The proportion increases to 68 percent in poor households. Extended distance learning is expected to have reduced the learning-adjusted years of schooling by over a full year. Learning loss, combined with the de-skilling associated with prolonged unemployment, could lead to sizable future earnings losses.
• Job polarization could further increase as the nature of work changes. Job polarization among wage workers emerged between 2016 and 2021: employment in middle-skilled occupations went down and employment in both low-skilled and high-skilled occupations went up. This pattern may rise with the transformation of jobs post-COVID-19 and could increase prevailing disparities in incomes.
• Policy can reduce inequality by supporting employment and workers, improving education access and quality, promoting inclusive rural development, strengthening social protection mechanisms, and addressing inequality of opportunity.

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

• Get Involved

• COVID PULSE PH: Urban Poverty in the Time of the Pandemic pdf (0.8 MB)

COVID PULSE PH: Urban Poverty in the Time of the Pandemic

pdf (0.8MB)

November 24, 2020

All over the world, poverty rates continue to rise for the first time since 1988, due to the #COVID19 pandemic. In the Philippines, a sobering fact indicates that several households have joined the ranks of the poor, thus reversing the gains made in the past decade in significantly reducing poverty. In the past nine (9) months of the pandemic, the Zero Extreme Poverty Philippines 2030 (ZEP 2030)— a coalition of non-government entities (NGEs) and networks—and the United Nations Development Programme Philippines (UNDP PH) have been working hard to take a pulse on how the urban poor in the Philippines has been affected by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. COVID PULSE PH: Urban Poor in the Time of the Pandemic  - is a summary off findings from the second phase of the a survey, conducted from August 21 to October 11, that aimed to tell a more detailed story of how the pandemic has affected the lives of low-income households.

Document Type

Regions and countries, sustainable development goals, related publications.

Publications

Undp philippines thematic focus briefer on circular econo....

The new UNDP Country Programme Document (CPD 2024 - 2028) for the Philippines focuses on three key areas of intervention: inclusion and resilience building; sus...

UNDP Philippines Thematic Focus Briefer on DIGITALIZATION

UNDP Philippines Thematic Focus Briefer on SOCIAL ENTERPR...

UNDP Philippines Thematic Focus Briefer on SUSTAINABLE LI...

Rethinking Circular Economy: Integrating Gender Equality,...

Rethinking Circular Economy: Integrating Gender Equality, Disability and Social Inclusion is a resource material which seeks to assist circular economy practiti...

Baseline for Circular Economy in the Philippines

Produced through the Accelerating Nationally Determined Contributions through Circular Economy in Cities (ACE) Project, with the support of KPMG, The Baseline f...

Jump to navigation

• Welcome to Oxfam Philippines

The future is equal

Search form.

COVID-19 and the Poverty Pandemic

Preventing transmission of the COVID-19 disease requires that we consistently exercise proper health and hygiene protocols, both in our homes and in public spaces. Authorities have also advised that we all steer clear of large gatherings, avoid using public transportation, follow “community quarantine” measures, and seek prompt medical attention when there is exposure to the disease. While all these are sound reminders, there is one glaring problem – the poor will not be able to afford to follow these.

Many jobs have no paid sick leaves. Irregular workers, including those who are paid on a per output, takay, or pakyaw basis, are particularly vulnerable. Working from home is not an option for all workers, as in the case of jeepney drivers and service workers. Crowding cannot be avoided in mass transport systems. In crisis situations, poor women and girls are affected the most because many of them form part of this workforce, but are still expected to do unpaid care and domestic work, which only tends to increase when caring for sick members of the family.

Poor people inordinately bear the brunt of economic shocks brought by this pandemic. Many informal, micro-, small-scale, and even up to medium-scale enterprises will take the hit as compared to the larger and more established businesses. Many may have to stop operations or close down because they would not be able to absorb the shocks to the economy. Hoarding of essential goods such as soap, alcohol, and basic food items only raises market prices and creates access barriers. Stocking up on food and medicines is impossible for those without regular incomes, savings, the unbanked, or those without access to financial services.

While it may be true that COVID-19 is not the proximate cause of these underlying problems, what is true is that it threatens the already fragile social safety nets of the Philippines. What pro-poor solutions could be considered to reduce inequalities in the time of COVID-19, particularly in ensuring access to water?

First, local governments could use calamity funds to subsidize water costs for the poorest sectors, particularly informal settler families (ISFs) crowding in the urban centers. Safe water is beyond the reach of poor communities because of access and cost barriers. For example, a recent study made by A Single Drop for Safe Water identified that in Pasig and Manila cities, an average person only has access to 12-13 liters of water per day. This is drastically below what the DILG recommends, which should range between 20-80 liters per person each day. For a minimum of 10 cubic meters, Manila Water and Maynilad charge around Php 88-130 per month, whereas the community pays between Php 500-900 per month to both formal and informal suppliers for less than 3.6 cubic meters. Oftentimes, this water needs to be fetched, and it ultimately puts limits on hygiene practices. The lack of access and the high costs of safe water puts the poorest and most vulnerable at risk since proper hygiene is a challenge.

Second, partnerships with WASH-related private sector companies should be explored. There are companies willing and capable of subsidizing the regular supply of hygiene items for the poorest and most vulnerable, especially older persons, lactating and pregnant women, families with infants and small children. Incorporating a gender perspective into plans and strategies enables response operations to efficiently reach underserved and at-risk individuals. Local governments could also use calamity funds to distribute cash vouchers to low-income families to enable them to buy hygiene items locally.

Finally, it is important to work with poor communities to strengthen communications on hygiene and health promotion. Local governments, community groups, and the private sector can join forces and form a local network that could support poorest families in obtaining accurate and useful information on COVID-19, as well as provide free and immediate testing, quarantine and medical assistance for suspected cases.

Safe water, adequate sanitation, and hygienic conditions are crucial to health and wellbeing, more so in this time of COVID-19. Let us make sure no one gets left behind.

Copyright © 2024 Oxfam Philippines. All rights reserved.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

Pandemic Pantries in the Streets? You Communist!

By Glenn Diaz

Mr. Diaz is a writer based in Manila. His second novel, “Yñiga,” about the spate of political killings in the Philippines in the 2000s, was shortlisted for the 2020 Novel Prize.

MANILA — The day the city went back into a hard lockdown in late March, I started a ritual: Trapped again, I took to counting the ambulance sirens I’d hear from my place in Quezon City, the most populous area of this sprawling capital. At one point, blare after dystopian blare came every 20 minutes or so.

The confirmed Covid-19 case total in the Philippines breached the one million mark in late April. New daily cases were averaging about 7,700 this week, down from a peak of about 10,800 in mid-April, but that’s still considerably more than the previous high of about 4,400 in late August. And the Department of Health warned recently that the situation could quickly worsen again and the Philippines could face the “big possibility” of an “India-like” catastrophe.

Dire superlatives limn the costs of the state’s neglect. Figures for infections and deaths per capita in the Philippines are now the worst in Southeast Asia. The economic downturn here has been the steepest in the region . The country faces the most sluggish economic recovery .

I started counting sirens out of helplessness and rage; it was a desperate attempt to get a handle on what is really happening on the ground, given competing accounts and confounding official policies.

At the height of the recent surge, the government claimed that around 14 percent of beds in intensive care units in Metro Manila were still available , even as social media feeds were flooded with calls for help and stories of patients being taken to facilities four or five hours away because of long waiting lists.

The health care system is buckling after decades of austerity and privatization . But more than anything, the culprit is the Duterte administration’s penchant for solutions anchored in brute force and draconian control rather than science and concern for the public’s welfare.

Led by a Covid task force filled with military officials , the government’s pandemic response is bannered by a militarized approach to containment, exceedingly strict lockdowns and punitive measures against supposed violators. One man accused of breaking quarantine reportedly died after being forced by police officers to do squat-like exercises as punishment.

In late March, a journalist succumbed to the virus after isolating himself in his car : He had stocked it with food and water, terrified of infecting his family and only too aware of the dire state of health facilities. Around that time, Mr. Duterte vanished from the public eye for a couple of weeks, fueling rumors about his failing health. (#PatayNaBa — Is he dead? — trended on Twitter.)

Still, the government insisted that it had done an “ excellent job ” of containing the virus. “ We did not fall short ,” Mr. Duterte intoned in his trademark drawl after he reappeared.

His spokesman, Harry Roque — who tested positive for the virus in early April and miraculously found an empty bed at the top government hospital — has placed the blame for the recent surge in cases squarely on new virus variants. Not on reopening up too quickly after an earlier lockdown, not on a virtually nonexistent contact-tracing system, not on a botched vaccination deal that may have delayed the beginning of inoculations by months. As of Friday, just 0.3 percent of the population had been fully vaccinated, according to Bloomberg’s vaccine tracker.

Look at Germany, look at France, the government says; rich countries are also suffering. A memo from the presidential communications office was leaked recently: It directed state media to emphasize the global picture “to convey to the public that the Philippines is faring better than many other countries in addressing the pandemic.”

Mr. Duterte, the archetypal strongman, is adamant about controlling the narrative. His government has remained popular despite a war on drugs that has killed thousands of people , the shutdown of the country’s biggest media network and the jailing of a senator in the opposition. Mr. Duterte is supposed to leave office next year, and his daughter Sara leads opinion polls as the choice for the next president.

It was amid the mounting anguish and collective grief that in mid-April, Ana Patricia Non, who goes by Patreng, placed a rickety bamboo cart on the side of Maginhawa Street , in the mostly well-to-do neighborhood of Quezon City near the campus of the University of the Philippines.

Ms. Non, 26, loaded the cart with the simplest of food items: canned goods, rice and pieces of hardy chayote, a local gourd. Taped on a nearby lamppost were two cardboard signs. One said “Maginhawa Community Pantry.” The other stated the pantry’s operating principle: “Give what you can. Take what you need.”

Among the first photos that spread on social media, one showed an older woman holding open her reusable bag while Ms. Non put bundles of leafy vegetables inside. In another , Ms. Non was crouched next to the pantry, which she replenished with greens from the baskets around her.

As word got around, more people — including a few, no doubt, among the millions who have lost their jobs in the pandemic — made a beeline to Maginhawa.

Rising to the challenge, people sent bagfuls of groceries . The owners of nearby stores where supplies were being bought matched those donations. Farmers from tens of miles north sent sacks of sweet potatoes ; fishermen to the south, kilos of tilapia .

The idea behind the pantries was inviting in its simplicity; the exchange, at its heart, instinctive and mutually gratifying. It linked people and communities torn apart by the lockdown.

Most important, it fed those in need: As of late March, some 3.2 million people in Metro Manila, or almost one in four residents, were thought to be going hungry . Ms. Non’s pantry was like the first drop of rain landing on parched earth.

Within two weeks, more than 400 pantries reportedly had sprouted across the country.

In my neighborhood, not far from Maginhawa, a call for donations went out on Twitter. The following morning, there was a plastic table on the side of a quiet road and on it a bag brimming with garlic, onions and tomatoes — the critical starter ingredients for most Filipino dishes. There were signs bearing the name of our area and Ms. Non’s mantra, “Give what you can. Take what you need.”

With no prodding, someone made better-looking signs. People volunteered for grocery runs. Donations continued to pour in, all accounted for in a public spreadsheet. In a group chat, there were conversations about setting up a soup kitchen or community gardens next.

The pantries exposed the granular suffering that the most vulnerable among us experience daily, the quiet scraping-by. They reminded people of the government’s paltry aid . “ Tayo-tayo na lang ,” went a common refrain on social media; we’re on our own. Like the ambulances I track, the pantries are a coping mechanism that also upends any illusion of normalcy.

Which is why the government’s storytellers promptly went to work. The communists were using the pantries to recruit rebels , they warned. The pantries’ slogan was Marx-adjacent.

Among the most virulent critics is Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade Jr. , the garrulous spokesman for the government’s anti-communist task force, which ostensibly was created to end Asia’s longest-running insurgency . In a televised interview on April 20, General Parlade compared Ms. Non with Satan : Both may seem to operate on their own, he said, but in reality they are propped up by a massive, concerted operation — in this case, the vile communist network.

Vice President Leni Robredo , several senators and lawyers’ groups have denounced this red-tagging of pantry organizers and have called for their protection.

The pop-up food banks are an affront to the state’s legitimacy, evidence of the failure of its pandemic response. As a spontaneous expression of a community’s caring, they also expose the violent and self-serving drives that animate this government and subordinate the people’s welfare to political gain.

In July, Congress railroaded an antiterrorism law that critics warned would pave the way for a brazen crackdown on perceived enemies of the state . The nongovernmental organization Karapatan reported more than 50 extrajudicial killings between the law’s passing and the end of 2020; among the victims were community organizers, activists and farmers who had been denounced by state officials.

On March 7, just days after Mr. Duterte ordered security forces to “ kill them all ,” in reference to communist rebels, nine people died in a raid against left-leaning community organizers and activists.

“Give what you can. Take what you need.” How much has the government given, considering what it has taken?

Glenn Diaz ( @glennndiaz ) is the author of the novels “The Quiet Ones” and “Yñiga.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram .