PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT
NO HOLDS BARRED (069) May 23, 2010
By Ike Señeres
PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT
American President Barack Obama won on a platform of change. It was a popular and practical platform for America, because over there, progress and development is no longer an issue. The American people still needed change, even if their country is already very much progressive, and is already fully developed.
Presidential front runner Noynoy Aquino appears to have won here also on a platform of change, albeit more specifically on the angle of removing corruption, supposedly as a means to remove poverty. For lack of a better term, I would call this a rock bottom approach, because it starts from the bottom line goal of removing poverty, without a clear goal of achieving prosperity for the nation up ahead.
What does removing poverty mean? I hope that the economists under Noynoy would be able to tell the difference between poverty reduction and poverty alleviation, a dichotomy that has escaped the appreciation of past administrations. Poverty reduction means lowering the poverty rate based on clear economic targets. Poverty alleviation means lowering the rate of suffering below the poverty line.
What is the difference between progress and development? It is very important to ask this question, because the dichotomy between the two has apparently also escaped the appreciation of past administrations. Just to give you a clue, progress could happen even without clear economic targets, and even without a development plan. Strictly speaking, progress could even happen even without development.
Here is another clue: poverty reduction is a measure of development. Therefore, it goes without saying that the reduction of poverty should be a specific goal within an objective development plan. Poverty reduction could never happen as an accident, in much the same way that accidental progress could also happen even without an objective development plan. Actually, even poverty alleviation could not happen as an accident.
For some reason, the government could only think in terms of ten year development plans, this being the function of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA). If the government would insist on looking only at the short term, they should at least think in terms of twelve year development plans, because that would exactly cover the terms of two fixed term Presidents.
Except for perception surveys, there is no practical method of measuring the removal of corruption. The good news is, there are many reliable methods of measuring the reduction of poverty, this being the more reasonable goal, instead of the removal of poverty. First things first however, the new administration should revisit the definition of the poverty threshold, since the costs of the goods in the “imaginary basket” have already changed.
The science of measuring development is exact, as a matter of fact, the measurements are already defined and prescribed in the medium term (ten year) development plan that the government already has. Other than that, there are other international means of measurement that the government could use, such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and the Human Development Index (HDI) of the United Nations.
I am hoping that at the end of the term of the new administration, they will be able to report quantitative gains in actual development achievements, instead of mere qualitative claims in terms of progress alone, such as saying that corruption is already “gone”.
I do not know how long it will take us, but I think that our real long term goal, way beyond twelve years, perhaps all the way to forty eight years, is to regain our economic dominance in the ASEAN region as a nation, a position that we used to hold until we went downwards due to the lack of development. Semantically, we could say that we progressed, but definitely, we did not develop quickly enough to catch up with the other economies.
If you have suggestions or complaints addressed to the Senate, send them to me so that I could post these in my other blog, SENERES SA SENADO. This new blog will also contain posts and press releases from all Senators.
Watch KA IKING LIVE! Thursdays 7pm to 8pm in Global News Network (GNN), Channel 21 in Destiny Cable. Email iseneres@yahoo.com or text +639293605140 for local cable listings. Visit www.senseneres.blogspot.com
By Ike Señeres
PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT
American President Barack Obama won on a platform of change. It was a popular and practical platform for America, because over there, progress and development is no longer an issue. The American people still needed change, even if their country is already very much progressive, and is already fully developed.
Presidential front runner Noynoy Aquino appears to have won here also on a platform of change, albeit more specifically on the angle of removing corruption, supposedly as a means to remove poverty. For lack of a better term, I would call this a rock bottom approach, because it starts from the bottom line goal of removing poverty, without a clear goal of achieving prosperity for the nation up ahead.
What does removing poverty mean? I hope that the economists under Noynoy would be able to tell the difference between poverty reduction and poverty alleviation, a dichotomy that has escaped the appreciation of past administrations. Poverty reduction means lowering the poverty rate based on clear economic targets. Poverty alleviation means lowering the rate of suffering below the poverty line.
What is the difference between progress and development? It is very important to ask this question, because the dichotomy between the two has apparently also escaped the appreciation of past administrations. Just to give you a clue, progress could happen even without clear economic targets, and even without a development plan. Strictly speaking, progress could even happen even without development.
Here is another clue: poverty reduction is a measure of development. Therefore, it goes without saying that the reduction of poverty should be a specific goal within an objective development plan. Poverty reduction could never happen as an accident, in much the same way that accidental progress could also happen even without an objective development plan. Actually, even poverty alleviation could not happen as an accident.
For some reason, the government could only think in terms of ten year development plans, this being the function of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA). If the government would insist on looking only at the short term, they should at least think in terms of twelve year development plans, because that would exactly cover the terms of two fixed term Presidents.
Except for perception surveys, there is no practical method of measuring the removal of corruption. The good news is, there are many reliable methods of measuring the reduction of poverty, this being the more reasonable goal, instead of the removal of poverty. First things first however, the new administration should revisit the definition of the poverty threshold, since the costs of the goods in the “imaginary basket” have already changed.
The science of measuring development is exact, as a matter of fact, the measurements are already defined and prescribed in the medium term (ten year) development plan that the government already has. Other than that, there are other international means of measurement that the government could use, such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and the Human Development Index (HDI) of the United Nations.
I am hoping that at the end of the term of the new administration, they will be able to report quantitative gains in actual development achievements, instead of mere qualitative claims in terms of progress alone, such as saying that corruption is already “gone”.
I do not know how long it will take us, but I think that our real long term goal, way beyond twelve years, perhaps all the way to forty eight years, is to regain our economic dominance in the ASEAN region as a nation, a position that we used to hold until we went downwards due to the lack of development. Semantically, we could say that we progressed, but definitely, we did not develop quickly enough to catch up with the other economies.
If you have suggestions or complaints addressed to the Senate, send them to me so that I could post these in my other blog, SENERES SA SENADO. This new blog will also contain posts and press releases from all Senators.
Watch KA IKING LIVE! Thursdays 7pm to 8pm in Global News Network (GNN), Channel 21 in Destiny Cable. Email iseneres@yahoo.com or text +639293605140 for local cable listings. Visit www.senseneres.blogspot.com
posted by Ike Señeres at 8:32 PM
1 Comments:
..save the earth. I'm sure you want to take part in this very important task. And it takes group effort to accomplish this. As the owner of a conscientious blog, I've picked you as an ideal model of greening the world. That's why I'm asking you if I might interest you in taking part in saving our planet by doing the green initiative of spreading the latest news and tips on how to green the world.
If you would, please copy and paste this script to your website:
http://ecoseed.org/en/home/6143
You would be getting the latest tips on how to green the world directly at your site, updated daily and the wonderful thing about this --aside from helping green the planet through info dissemination—is that it's free!
So please consider putting this on your site. In turn, we would also be promoting your site. Please let me know what you think. Thanks!
You may also be interested in contributing an article to our site. If you are, please click this:
http://ecoseed.org/en/component/juser/user/login?return=aHR0cDovL2Vj b3NlZWQub3JnL2luZGV4LnBocC9ob21lLzYxNDI2FbGFuZz1lbg3D3D
Thanks and More Power!
Post a Comment
<< Home