ids | HINKING PE Nofolt aa tal W Lolo ee ee eae eee ne ee eee een eee en Dagens ae eet eRe aetna ae ae te een HS ipeseny 21 ying ave pa gpaditah ied a characterizations, the thoughts and experiences of the poor are reflected La} Ree eee Mets nk ee at ee ea eee ee od is poverty? How do they conceive features of poverty? What are considered as eee esa AC eee eet ere kee the depressed communities? Why do people side to poverty end remain poor THRIVING, MOVING OUT OF POVERTY IN CITIES while others ably move out? How do the poor thrive, improve and move out of 4 Les 3 Tae a pea Se RR eee eA unre and local government, perceived discrimination, change end improvement in their communities. Its novel focus rests on its detailed accounts on the stories of the poor themselves as they slid, thrived and moved out of poverty. It DS he ke ee ee ard CE ec kei uC RUA ole Se ce reer ed on poverty in urban areas is its being anchored on ground realities Instead of Understanding and determining waye to exit poverty using macro experiences and preconceived theses and ideologies, this volume identifies the factors that Pe aula ae eee tr ert oe oe a ae Ma ae Ce UT Ru eae ek tees well-being of individuals and communities. o ef abely La] “PRACTICES: Tro iNickelate toe na ney fe DLSU by Exaltacion Ellevera-Lamberte peered Social Capital i2 Roving orpecies and Practices Multidimensional Perspective of Poverty Poverty has been defined and measured in different ways. ‘The divergent views, issues and arguments are raised in favor of or against the usc of any one of these varying definitions and measures which in the end depend on the standpoint and academic discipline of a researcher or a social scientist. "This is, of course, expected in that the consequent defiaition and construction of poverty measures that distinguish the poor from the non-poor carties with it an implied judgment and assumption about the well-being of people. Iealso brings with ie the appreciation and bias of the particular social policy governing the advancement of the welfare of people Coming up with such a measure implies that itis not just the well-being of the general population that masters but aso and most especially, that of the vulnerable and disadvantage groups, Absolute Poverty and Relative Poverty Poverty can be conceptualized in a number of ways Because of this, the understanding of its meaning also varies. These variations result in the emergence of differences in the manner by which indicators are used to classify people who are “poor” and “not poor” and in the characterization of the level of deprivation, The ways to track and measure the progress in the condition through time will differ as wel. Specifically, poverty may be conceived in two ways: absolute and relative poverty. Poverty defined in absolute terms refers to a state in which an individual lacks the yesources necessary for subsistence. Ir is perceived as subsistence below the minimum requirements for physical well-being, generally based on income oF ealosie intake; a¢ times, it takes into account a broader package of goods and serviccs, The earliest study on poverty conducted by ae Intrduation a Rowntree in 1901 in England conceived of poverty as primarily having an income below what is needed to obtain the minimum necessities for maintaining physical efficiency. Estimating the minimum standard of living requirements that was thought to be appropriate for the people at that time, he estimated the cost of food (based on calories required by individuals of different ages and sexes) and added the estimated amount for basic clothing, fuel aad housing. He then used this to draw a poverty line where households could be assigned to positions below or above the said line. The absolute notion and measure of poverty is ptedominantly used by many development practitioners and researchers, particularly economists, since it is believed to offera clear and attainable poverty policy and program such as income augmentation and/or cash transfer. It is based on the notion of economic deprivation that people need to consume a minimum level of goods to survive (World Bank, 1990) ‘The underlying argument is that it is important to examine the monetary resources that are available to an individual of a household to fully comprehend the poverty status of people and the communities. Thus, the classic definition of poverty has always been “the inability to attain a minimal standard of living” measured in terms of basic consumption needs or the income required for satisfying them (World Bank 1990). The use of minimum levels of daily food energy requirement, which is demonstrated into a “poverty line” os “bread basket poverty line,” is the commonly accepted measure for absolute poverty. This approach to poverty measurement requires constructing a poverty line which will be utilized to delineate the “poor” from the “non-poor” It is based on some threshold income or expendituze necessary to secure a minimum or socially acceptable standard amount of food and nutrition as well as other necessities (World Bank, 1990). This economic or money-metric measure of14 Rethinking Perpectves and Practices poverty has provided a useful tool for understanding the patterns of deprivation and for comparing different groups or countries and across time. Monitoring of poverty levels and comparative assessment is, therefore, easily facilitated through the use of said measure. ‘The absolute notion of poverty, however, has been challenged by non-economists, notably the sociologists (Townsend, 1974, 1979; Chambers, 1983). Townsend (1974) argued that poverty can be defined only in relative, and never in absolute, terms. He argued that a subsistence standard might appear to be absolute and physiologically determined but this is not in reality the case. People might be considered to live in poverty if their living condition is deprived relative to the standard of living that is customary in their society, It always involves standards that are culture- specific. To live in poverty, therefore, is to be excluded from the kind and level of living that is regarded by people as normal for members of their society. Thus, what might be acceptable as required diet or standard of living today may not be acceptable to people of the future generation. And 1c acceptable in one place of country may not be acceptable in another. Relative poverty, on one hand, refers to an individual's or group's lack of resources when compared with those of other members of the society. Measures of relative poverty are not simply a matter of subjective feelings of poverty, although one cannot deay the importance of such feelings when analyzing outcomes of poverty, Sociologists (Petct Townsend (1978, 1982, 1987), Rainwater (1976) and Herbert Blumer (1976) have argued that it is useful to define and understand poverty in relative rather than absolute terms. The underlying reason is that it is possible that families and/or households can have adequate monetary resources for survival but may not enjoy the benefits of decent living or are unable eo achieve well: Introduction 15 b 1} y ti a [may possibly be excluded from ordinary economic pi ne i fe. The idea of relative poverty recognizes: (a) that Prone: en excluded from and thus cannot participate in the pemcin tural life of their society; (b) that people's choices api i oie avoidance of risks becomes a primordial and, (d) that people may perceive and fe lick convol over theres ‘Tus, hgh come docs nk Sxomatcally wanslate into atinment of wellbeing, In is Ipaamee, the concepr of wel-bsing emerges as an adkonal consider when one examines lev i ean, '¢ examines level of deprivation or The subjective ive’ approach to underst: ve underscores the idea that poverty and “ibenge ane defined by the poor themselves. Ie is argued that ee given to absolure poverty are something that is imposed y experts, likely making the poor peo Betpeiie : poor people disempowered Ga Sterived oF thei right to create their own knowledge Giddens (1991) observed that people's distrust on ex ae oa Bees the growing awareness of people Senate ring to take responsibility of their future, an em i ci isn emerging an incening elev oecusng sng rope as they thinks deeply into the ssks.and challenges rat let ate facing, Refleiviry in this context refers to the Process whereby people observe what are occurring and lect on them and later decide on the cor : that they should take. odo aoseqln th same manner, the use of the notion of subjective ssessment in poverty studies originated from th ol oA rom the rk. poser nits SCO on Seal ra ers, 1994) which was then developed j sn develoy ipa or mene Raa ae OF poverty focus on the immediate needs of the poor and fae oe pees of the poor themselves. One of strengths of participatory approaches to poverty16 Rosbinking Porpections and Prater measurement is that it recognizes the diversity of perceptions of poverty, thereby facilitating an understanding of the many dimensions of poverty from the view of a particular group of people (Weatten, 1995). ‘The Voices of the Poor (VOP) series (Narayan, etal. 1999, 2000) which conducted participatory poverry assessments in 58 countries in the developing and cransitional world, suggested differences and similarities of people's views and experiences. Characterization of material and psychological well- and ill-being included: powerlessness, vulnerability and coping strategies, relationships with state and civil society institutions, gender relations, and social fragmentation atthe houschold and community levels, These wide-ranging studies by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) emphasized that for many, wealth and well-being aré not identical. This VOP. setics also highlighted the exclusionary and corrupt nature of many of the state institutions in relation to the poor and the fear of the poor of serious illness, disability or death within the houschold, especially as it becomes instrumental in the impoverishment of the household. Security of assets — viewed in the broadest sense to refer to material assets, particulatly land, common property fesources, human capital and social capital — is underscored as the primary concern in poverty rather than income, ‘The focus on well-being indicators has been associated swith the international development community and agencies and is less Enked with the classic notion of the market as the toad to people-centered development and poverty alleviation strategies. Ie views the poor as deprived of basic opportunities to lead long, healthy and creative lives and recognizes the exclusions and. segmentations which characterize existing ‘marker situations. It also sees public action as important in managing the fruits of economic development in the interests of all (Kabeer, 1996), Introduction ” During the 1980s and 1990s, the World Bank focused on the promotion of economic growth as a poverty reduction strategy. At the same time,’it encouraged governments to cut subsidies in the social sector, Following this direction, the 1990 World Develppment Report defined poverty in terms of low consumption, poor health status and limited educational achievements. It recommended three major strategies for poverty reduction, namely, broad-based growth, human development and safety nets, It emphasized the idea that poverty reduction should concentrate on labor-intensive growth and provision of social services. However, the cut in subsidies in the social sector produced a negative impact on the lives of the poor. ‘To réspond to this sievation, the 1990s saw an increasing emphasis on basic needs, rights-based approach, vulnerability and social exclusion. ‘The 2000 World Development Report reflected the change in the views on poverty. It underscored the importance of building assets and creating livelihood opportunities. It cook 2 wider view of poverty, encompassing material deprivation, poor health, low educational achievements, vulnerability and tisks, and voicelessness and powerlessness (Carter and Barrett 2003)). Thus, che World Bank (2002) defined poverty as “a pronounced deprivation in well-being,” where well-being can be measured by an individual's possession of income, health, nutrition, education, assets, housing and certain rights such a3 freedom of speech. Poverty is also viewed as the deprivat assets and opport to which every human being is cntidled (ADB, 1999; UNDP, 2001; World Bank, 2002), Specifically, it is associated with powerlessness, lack of freedom to participare, vulnerability, deHiciéney in social isons insecurity, low self-confidence and insuffe18 Rethinking Perppocives and Paster in poverty reduction. strategies. ‘This is very eloseXo the concept of well-being as the level of quality of life or the extent to which people can avoid the various miseries (Andrews, 1974). Gecurity) andSpportunity) Given this strand of thought, multidimensional poverty as a construct could besmeasured in varied ways using variant methodologies. This volume attempts to deal swith and explore the manifest features of multidimensional poverty in Philippine cities with the end-goal of providing an adequate understanding of the persistent poverty problem in the country. As Mills (1959) said, social problem ed to be examined in a holistic mapner i better understanding Of a spssiic social Dimensions of Poverty ‘This study adopts the World Bank’s definition it describes poverty as “a pronounced deprivation in_well- being”, se well-being Gabe mexsured by an india possession of income, health, nutrition, education, assets, housing, and certain rights such as er BER 2012). It is also viewed as deprivation of essential assets ot ‘opportunities 1 which every human helng js entitled (ADB, 1999; UNDP, 2001; World Bank, 2002). Specifically, it is associated with powerlessness, lack of freedom to participate, vulnerability, deficiency in social relations, insecurity, low self-confidence, and insufficient outcomes ‘with respect to health, nutrition and literacy. Going beyond the usual aspects of poverty discourse, this volume examines urban poverty in terms of two facts in the social life of the poor: deprivation and social exclusion, Henee, in addition to the usual demographic and economic characterization of the phenomenoa, the study broadens the meaning ‘of poverty to include deprivation not only in income Istreducion 19 consumption level but also in other forms of non-monetary resources and opportunities. This broadening of definition is part of a more fundamental shift in development thinking wherein poor people are no longer perceived as objects of government policy but as citizens with rights and legitimate demands. This book highlights the fact that indicators of well-being need to be less tied to the st forces in that the Key route to poverty reduction is something that is moving towards a human-centered action agenda. Deprivation is seen in terms of being depised of the resources necessary for the development of the poot’s capacities and participation ia mainstream institutions. It also means the lack of physical, social and psychological assets that every human being is entitled to such as adequate food, sheltes, education, health and living standards (ADB, 1999). Exclusion, on the other hand, is viewed with sespect to households not being made part of ordinary social life and/or not being able to participate in obtaining access to the different benefits and sewards that society can offet, Social exclusion denotes norms and societal and institutional processes that exclude groups from full participation in the social, economic, cultural and political life of societies (Narayan, 1999). Poverty, as it thus emerges in the context of urban areas, is viewed in this book in terms of the following dimensions (World Bank 2002; UNDP 2001) -Atncome Poverty, Because usban areas are mainly dominated by a cash economy, income poverty was assessed through the following intermediate and outcome indicators: poverty headcount based on household income data, access 10 ctedit, unemployment rate, and access w electricity and housing amenities. Atealth Poverty. Under this dimension, access to primary health care services and facilities was looked into. Wherever2 Rethinking Prpectives and Practices data are available, the health status of the urban poot is also examined. education Poverty. Poverty indicators included completion rate, level of educational attainment, and access to schooling, vr Security Poverty. Undet this dimension, the following indicators were studied: physical habieat, population in unauthorized housing, access to police sexvices, social problems emerging in the community, and perceptions on. safety in the neighborhood. Social Exclusion. This refers to the process by which certain groups are systematically disadvantaged because they are discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity, socio-economic status and gender. Social inclusion refers to positive action and this entails removal of institutional barriers and enhancement of incentives to increase access of diverse individuals and groups to development opportunities. ‘The indicators examined include: participation in political and community-based otganizations, membership in ‘cooperatives, access to information through media channels such as television and telephones, and perceived satisfaction with the services and attention provided by the local and ‘national governmeats, Analytical Approaches and Strategies ‘The distinction between urban and rural poverty is indisputably problematic for certain reasons, The functional ‘connections between cities and rural areas make it difficult to delineate and isolate the poverty related problems from one another. ‘The rural-urban interactions as exemplified in remittances, rural-urban migration, population growth, seasonal labor market movements, matkets for food, goods and services, family support andl others, all he more make the Tatroetion i distinction and segregation in the analysis challenging, Wratten (1995) argued that while drawing a clear distinction between urban and rural poverty is’ difficult, the effects of urban Poverty arc uniquely compounded by the nature of the urban environment often characterized by commercial exchanges, ion and ins ‘Thus, when conducting urban poverty assessments, Wratten (1995) identified certain aspects of poverty which are closely linked with urbanization and where data therefore need 10 be collected. These are: (a) urban and environmental health risks; (b) vulnerability arising from commercial exchange; (©) social_dive Frag and crime; and, (4) vulnerability arising police: ‘The approach of analysis expounded by Mitlin (2005) farther enriched the analysis specific to urban areas which are as follows: (a) Spatial analysis. ‘The levels of poverty may vary according to sertlements as a result of factors such as price levels, the extent of markets and commodification, and the costs imposed by high density living without adequate services and infrastructure. Whatever the area is, large aumber of poor households are likely to be living in informal settlements and sometimes illegal ncighborhaass because the cost of formal housing is beyond their teach; (b) Vulnerable group analysis. This looks at individual, group and houschold characteristics, the latter of which may include those related to life cycle, lack of economic opportunities, discrimination and other reasons of limited assets, OF significance are characteristics that are socially created and nor innate such as societal attitudes of youth, gender and others. ‘These all indicate who ate vulnerable to poverty or not; (c) Labor market outcomes. Of importance is the emerging pattern of shifting awa from formal to informal employment and the falling of seal wages in cities. The relationship between poverty and2 Rethinking Permpecies ad Prasties wit informal employment is examined in this dimension; and, (a) Networks and linkages. This includes an analysis of ‘the connections that poor people have to enable them to enjoy access to essential services and livelihood opportunities, Patronage and networks outside of the family and relatives are significant ateas,to.examine in urban areas as these may have a significant role in devermining effective strategies to poverty reduction, In this volume, the characterization of poverty and portrayal of depth of poverty in cities is facilitated through the conduct of (a) Spatial Analysis and (b) Vulnerable Group. Analysis. Spatial analysis focuses on the geographic location of the very poor people in cities and how this habitat connects with their level of poverty while vulnerable proup analysis centers on the characteristies of specific groups facing high risks by reason of the life eycle stage, In the present research, children as a sector became the subject of vulnerability analysis, Furthermore, focus is centered ‘on environment-related risks, vulnerability arising from commercial exchange, heterogeneity of the residents in urban poor communities, fragmentation and social ilLeffeets of poverty and government interventions which brought about either positive or negative consequences on the lives of these people. Labor market outcomes and networks as swell as linkages are also analyzed, particularly as they relate to the manner by which urban poor tesidents live within poverty environments, depressed community surroundings and difficult circumstances. ‘Why Examining Urban Poverty Matters ‘Why is research dealing on poverty in Philippine cities significant? The end-goal of undertaking a compzchensive research on urban poverty is to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon and to link it with action Introduction ron a recommendations to move toward social transformation, This is important in the light of the need to arrest the continued increase in the number of people experiencing poverty, particularly in the context of the past and present ctises that the country has faced and is facing. ‘The discussion is embedded with a high degree of optimism and hope while searching for better, more effective and newer ways of confronting the problem. An optimistic view will likely bring about a desirable multiplier effect in the amelioration of poverty as well as improvement in the quality of life of many of the poor people in the Philippines. For one, the spirit of optimism and campaign for greater attention will bring to the public open discussions, debates as well as arguments about the causes of poverty and assodiated policy formulations and ptescriptions, Hopefully, this discourse will raise awareness of the depth and severity of the problem of human deprivation and help mobilize resources. More than that, it will hopefully ‘arouse commitment and political will among all stakeholders, not only in government but also among private organizations in the fight against poverty. For a time, urban poverty was relatively little studied. AAs suggested by Maxwell et al. (2000), and the editorials of Environment and Urbanization in 1995, poverty analysis has suffered from the acceptance of “urban bias.” This paucity in the understanding of urban poverty is underlined by the World Development Report special issue (March 2003), which includes fan analysis of four panel data sets that are all exclusively rural. The lack of general research data has also been nosed by other researchers of urban poverty (Haddad et al, 1999; ‘Mitlin, 2005), In recent times, however, thee have been some indications of change in the attention paid to urban poverty. It fs now more widely acknowledged that many urban residents in tecent years have not benefited from urban economic growth (Rakodi, 2002; Mitlin, 2005). In addition, Haddad et al. (1999) have opined thar the growing interest ia urban poverty24 Rethinking Popes ond Paster has resulted ina change in attitudes and many researchers ard analysts now believe that the locus of poverty in contemporary times is gradually shifting away from raral areas and moving toward urban communities. Poverty in Philippine cities is nothing new, What is new about today’s state of deprivation in urban areas is aot poverty per se but rather its persistence, enormity, potential for rapid increase in magnitude, and the paradox of its existence alongside expected high levels of living standards, advanced technology and visible wealth characterizing many cities. Much more disturbing is that it thre id erodes the opportunities for poverty reduction efforts, owing 10 tapid demographic usbanization, space and, geographic limitations, and the slow decline in the cities’ rate of poverty amelioration. The direction of the statistics and the pattern of worsening poverty seem to move faster than the capacities of the nation to advance economically and socially to provide a decent and quality life for the people. ‘These emerging conditions make it impetative to do research on the nature and persistence of urban poverty in the countey. The slow improvement in the country’s urban poverty situation, together with the attendanc need for social protection, the rapid growth of the population and its consequent increase in the demand for services, and the stagaant (if not deteriorating) level of living standards, provide enough bases for increased attention and concern, ‘What is new-in this present study is not its extensive scientific documentation of the problem but its attempt to view the poverty situation using a multidimensional lens from a social perspective. Aside from the holistic meaning it gives to the concept of poverty, the research discussed in this volume also cxamines and makes use of equally important non-income measures patticularly social inclusion/ exclusion, the aspect that is rarely dealt with ia Philippine Insredastion 5 urban poverty research. Moreover, to provide an adequate understanding of the phenomenon, the study also explicates the factors contributing to the persistence of urban poverty in the country using grounded theory perspective. The use of the paradigm facilitates the identification of relevant development policies and programmatic strategies specific to poverty reduetion programs What is highlighted in this book is the lives of ordinary people as they thrive in the environment of deprivation and move within and below the edges of a decent and quality life. Basically, it underscores the lives of the actors, together ‘with the processes, insticutions and seructures impinging on those lives. The approach of the subject azea is not only on a macro bat also on a micro level ~ individual, family and/ ot household and community level. The focus is not only on the conditions and experiences of actors and families living in poverty conditions and the underlying causes of their poverty bur also on the strategies and creative ways by which these people ably thrive, overcome and have moved out from the poverty condition. Furthermore, this study differs from other studies of urban poverty because the researcher actually engages with the study participanss about their views, perceptions and experiences rather than simply consider commonplace labor market position, demographics and other characteristics. The documented experiences of actors, communities and collectivities in this book will in a way provide a mind map in confronting urban Poverty in the country, ‘To add, several features make this research-informed book different from others, One, it highlights some of the distinctive factors that have emerged as etitical in understanding the mature and incidence of poverty in urban areas, noting the high level of dependence on labor and commodity markets and the poor quality of the26 [Rethinking Perspectives and Praves living environment. The literature has firmly established the importance of the living environment in the context of urban poverty (Mitlin, 2005), It is argued that the combination of spatial characteristics (lack of services and unsafe physical environment), the incapacity 10 flourish in a cash economy, and the denial of legal and political rights that characterizes the situation of the urban poor makes urban povesty research different from the one on sural poverty. Two, unlike previous studies, the present study differentiates groups of the urban poor according to different facets and dimensions of poverty. In the Philippines, there are relatively few studies that make use of quantitative or qualitative analyses to classify the urban poor, The literature almost universally deals with highly aggregated groups of the urban poor In most cases, the term “urban poor” is used very generally with a spatial meaning (i.c., living in a low-income settlement) rather than with related characteristics such as low income, unmet basic reeds, social exclusion and lack of political attention. Three, a number of specific factors are considered here, including lifecycle and social exclusion as well as discrimination, especially among those who lack political connections and those who are vulnerable such as children and domestic helpers. Contemporary research on urban poverty in the Philippines has focused generally on ascertaining unidimen- sional income poverty, its magnitude, and characterizing its general features (Petnia, 1991; Lamberte, B. 1992, 1993, 1995, 2002; Balisacan, 1994). A number of studies in this area have analyzed urban poverty using generally economic and demographic perspectives (Pernia, 1991; Balisacan, 1994; Mills and Pernia, 1994; Manasan, 2002). Thus, in most of the literature, urban poverty has been explained in terms ‘of economic factors, rapid urbanization and the nature of economic policies and development approaches adopted by the government, This study fills a gap as it attempts to classify Introtion the poorin urban areas and examine the factors that contibut ‘0, Poverts especially irom a holistic perspective, Underlying # ramework is the recognition that no single factor can {ecount for the incidence of urban poverty, Hence, chis study oks in more derail at the multiplicity of causes and their interrelationships. Understanding what the interrelationships between the different factors are and how cvenaitnais rs are and how these relationships Jength and nature of multidim ae of wl ensional Poverty is critical to planning effective interventions, Research Methodology and Sources of Data AS stated in the edslier ee part of the discussion, gaps in ledge about multidimensional poverty are notabl ry are notable the _Efeiows seas on poversy in the developing cotta sana ig tt " Philippines. While a plethora of research are aablein the counery these studies have not adequately filled in the information gaps imperative for action and problem- solving strategies to confront and address the problem involved in poverty reduction. For instance, except for a fe Panel data rescarch, global and local researchers have noe really adequately pinpointed specific reasons on how som individuals with poor origin have been able to escape poverty and why some slid further to poverty. Previous des have missed out information on how families and persons deal with, cope with and survive poverty, thus, failing wo find connections ect between individual and group efforts and poverty dynamics, nies, To address the problem on gaps ia knowledge about poverty, the research project made use of both quantitative and qualitative research approaches and methods, Combinin; different approaches and triangelation strategy in the research, is important in providing an adequate understanding of the different facets and dimensions of poverty. Use of triangulation in all data collected helps cross-check and ver the self-reports which are based on simple recall of ee28 Rethinking Perpectves and Pasties participants, Information about each family or household is Obtained separately at both the community and the household levels, By utilizing a different set of techniques in coming up with the taxonomy and classification of poor people, one need not refer to of label someone as “poor” or “non-poor”, especially in small well-contained communities where everyone knows and is linked to cach other. To attain an adequate glimpse of the pietuse of the lives of people who live in poverty and those who exit out of poverty, the present sesearch includes both the macro-level, also called the “Big Picture,” and the micro-level or the “Small Picture” types of data, Integration of these varying levels of data is used in the analysis 10 establish a meaningful interface and connection of these types of information in order, t0 produce relevant knowledge about poverty necessary for policy formulation and the designing of appropriate programmatic action, The project has made use of the following sources of data: Macro Level: The Big Picture For the macro level data, the analysis of poverty dimension thas been facilitated through the use of the data set drawn from the National Statistics Office (NSO). A limitation however hhas to be mentioned and this refers to the availability of the most updated data particularly at the level of the cities, An. example of which is the National Demographic and Health Survey. The daa that were available were only those of the regional level. In certain cases, disaggregated urban and rural data sets were not readily given. For these cases, secondary data found relevant from othet sources and past studies have been resorted. The research made use of the national and city evel data, specifically the NSO data sets and the city-level dara drawn from vatious government agencies and offices. Intron 29 4. Use of statistical data available at the NSO. ‘To gather information about the phenomenon on a nationwide scale, the following existing data sets were subjected to re-analysis: (a) 1997 and 2000, 2003 and 2006 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (PIES) data seisy (b) 2000 National Census on Population and Housing Survey (CPHS); and (2) 1999 Anal Poverty Indicator Survey (APIS). &. Use of documents/records and reports. Documents and teports available at the national and local government offices providing, statistical information at the city levels have also been gathered and analyzed. Micro-Level: The Small Picture With the observation that poverty has been a persistent ies jn the counwy, the present research initives sarily focus on the poor themselves. The project centers on the phenomenon and the actors involved and affected by it, An analysis based on micto-level data would have a better opportunity to disentangle the different dimensions of poverty a8 well as the factors contributing to the persistence of poverty in cies, I is expected that the micro level daa would ably uncover the importance of each of the aspects of poverty at eieesl teananpovolgieccnmoaigaivel, ‘The major sources of the micro-level data have been the two community-wide survey conducted in the Cities of Manila and Muntinlnpa in che year 2004, and che 2006 in- depth case studies conducted in the cities of Muntinlupa, Cebu City and Cagayan de Ora cities, These thtec cities were. chosen because of their high level of urbanization particularly in the recent years. i2 Rethinking Perspectives and Presties ‘The global research initiated by Narayan (1999, 2000) which adopted a subjective approach and was initially based on. the participatory poverty appraisals, evidently demonstrated the multidimensional aspects and interlocking aature of poverty. This was found to be useful in developing policies and interventions for developing countries. ‘The same study also largely contributed highly to generating ideas on the ‘multidimensional understanding of the aspects of poverty, ‘as well as provided evidence on the similarities and hetero- geneity in the characteristics of the poor. In this section, findings on the concept of poverty by the poor will be discussed. The idea is to know how poor people look at deprivation itself and what must constitute as essential to living a decent life. * Concept of Poverty and Domains It is posited that when poor people are asked about theie concept and views on poverty, their responses differ according to their status and position. Persons who have slid into poverty and have endured prolonged or persistent poverty but, nonetheless, have been able to find employment in low-wage work in Metro Manila (¢.g., domestic helper, private car driver, gardener, security guard, helper in small-scale home-based business) have been interviewed. ‘Additional data were also gathered from the views and life stories of the poor themselves, especially those participants residing in depressed areas of selected cities such as Cagayan de Oro City, Cebu City and Muntinlupa City. The respondents were asked about: (a) their concept of poverty, (b) their characterization of poor individuals and comayu- nities, (c) their perceptions on types of poor people in their ‘own community, and, (d) what they considered essential or important for one to endure, make improvement and eventually move out of poverty: Peples Cons of Poort and Period Life Busts a To get somewhat consistent data, two separate surveys were conducted to clicit poor people’s notions of the word “poverty”. The fitst survey was conducted among 180 low- income service workers, most of whom are domestic helpers and household male workers on March 2006. Another survey of the same type using the same instrument was also done among 95 service workers on August 2006. Data show a consistent pattern indicating hunger and emotional aspects associated to poverty a8 features of the poverty concept. Feelings and emotions, however, were highlighted by a relatively higher petcentage of participants in the second survey (Table 2.1). When domestic helpers and those engaged in menial service-related work in selected cities in Metro Manila were asked the question “What words or phrases come to-your mind whea you hear the word “poverry”?”, about 18.72 erceat for the first survey and 27.71 percent for second Survey, respectively, conceived poverty in terms of subjective feelings and sentiments embedded in being poor rather than in terms of the lack 0 o: ‘or monetary resources. The themes that emerge in these sentiments point to feelings of discouragement, frustration, difficulties in life, disgust at being unable to improve oneself, being excluded from groups and benefits of services and displeasure as well as istaction toward oneself, family and government. About18 percent associated the concept of poverty with lack of income and mic difficulties experienced in life while approximately (2 percent cach associated it with not being able to meer basic needs, and Hunge intioned by more than one-fourth of the sespondeie C861 wind 25.68 %). ‘The respondents were also asked how they characterize “poor individuals” and “poor communities” and their sesponses are shown in Table 2.2, Again, unlike the popular notion, poverty is viewed in terms of non-income measures such, isionphysical fearuresvand negative44 Rethinking Pepto and Pacer While the case study respondents in selected cities identified similar characteristics of people who are considered ina state of deprivation, they also further provided a typology ‘of the poor before characterizing them. They reported that chaeacteristics of poor persons difier according to the different levels of groupings and categories. “Table 2.1. Concepts Assisted with Poverty Dora Sian Teen sy en ‘Heo kn, a0? Fag aT ae ma | 5% avec SEE a oR ae Lerman sromes Hem ames nT par | aT | rans aaa Beier aug inane Gant be me ot Salah eg ee aaa Seem penne ia) a ule aim a Sey nr jee soy sts a BT Lira tion Soa ae ae esas i Sac oo a 1A Lack of come and [No ronay = eat 1633 anaes a Sam in i oe ran ra sows shoe Rann aa |teemnd | gan eee 5 asa Petia [ae Et ae aor Sevier ama aaa cas fet [Wot responses acta 2 ie (ustems i 5 Pisce rg) ac ns om Peple’ Conapts of Poort on Pereceed Life Exwnticte 4 Taba 2.2. Characeratin of Indvduals Who are Poor eras Simao Parent Tato eathangr | ans eke fod awd 7881 ‘Ely naltoushadinode it a of mee pips fears (i, piyscay land weak and sy ered arg ocean das. Steuashuya foo sarrectas ea Oued on earns orted 7 Ata ecto oye aa ee aan H Wy ie W0 ‘isos ana_| Lose stant treme ae | Lass hope FE tad soit oe cornions Ferre so mary pabans tick of eateay tet of rovaressss incr a Fal of diznmnaten by there uly By ary enbae a3/PagRRO ak money and nertaok or rotary scwseaas upadeane | 167 ange ze Tho gervanent | Panels ard nea ne ‘el ‘ng nin seamen arse ting sal stata 5 ih ow aan ae Mosenaing Mo sot ets | Tara wots 7a ‘aca aes ag cin etsy cts 7 aden | ab mt ot eps ss ro ot Ta esta dra ey asta Ful ependa on oa “et ps ast maar rol Fess caring Sel ilo and sat eon ao ‘zoim stece fr | Beggs, menceans Sina Sarge That spe ED Niteases 70 In addition, two participants from a depressed barangay in Cagayan de Oto City indicated that there are three types of poor persons in their community, namely: (a) poor, (b) poor yet life conditions have improved a bit; che poot who live a telatively comfortable life, and (c) poorest of the poor or the chronically poor individuals, The poor, that is, the first group,46 Resin Parputioes and Prastions could further be chssified into: {a-1) those who are employed yet the income is not sufficient to address their needs; (2-2) people who have experienced on-and-of employment; (8-3) persons who are jobless but have someone or a family member providing support for their daily needs and survival, and (a-4) poor who have a house and regular employment but have low Income, and yet remain residents in the informal setelement area. _ ‘ate 23, Catan of Por Farin Soran Sao Fat {Ta tyra | Aor a 71 Sm ‘con kof ene ae SED ar wien Hoblekoess eomgiarsarin argo eaiaton | Foy exourncee agus chin | 287 rary wer mou aay fot eas aut, [Lack osneenmowtig | Srl stares 7 rig te Fai ning sve OS Siping ornare, Bra ones Lak cern [No Soc wc conesion 1628 Ne sus fa war io sepia tad Unensioed aa nares [No acl ey ranor ws nawngremunny [840 oer fat workag are Te Bagel Cale baer saves! cc en i sees a Lage utero young an ara en se eupants Large subs ea cna a Not respoes |aug savor lowe) e Not cass “The mass elites or persons working with the poor had similar views as those of the respondents. Mae, a social worker ‘working in a depressed area in Cagayan de Oro, said: Peoples Concepls of Poverty an Peraived Lie Bsentials A Blof indigence is characterized by te inability of individuals t0 meet the base needs and access the services, One can be classified as poor if he] she fails to cat three meals a day and arben bis/ ber income is not adequate to sastain the needs of bial ber famil. The chronic peor, ‘pobre na gyud kegolrery poor) pobre sa tanang pobre (poorest of the poor)": they do not have food to eas regularly and have to look for it dayeto- day or meal to-oneal, lace acess to basic skal services cand do nat have the ability to dress shomselees decent. Chronic poor indlsidaate have difieultes in providing themselves a shelter. Tn some cases, they have a place to stay, but onky makeshift quarters made of cigarette bases and bamban-sticks Normita, 2 civil servant, has this description of types 1 poor people and then corresponding characterization: The typical poor individuals and their faites sare those who are not able to moet ther basic needs hich include food, shelter, lating, education, Healt peace and order, water and sanitation. This is usally exprionced by penple mho fall below the poverty ine. The chronically poor persons are those who ca barddy eat three times a day. In otber words, if one fails to eat any; meal ata, be or sheds considered a chronically poor person 1 believe thatthe ety has so may families sw can hardy eat thrive. day, especialy those who lew in depressed urban poor comnounities. Teacher Cely from Muntinlupa City classified the po into nwo groups, namely, the poor in general and the pore of the poor. This participant recounts: Although a poor person complains, be dass something about bis condition, When be thinks of