SOUNDING BOARD is an outlet for opinions on good and crazy things going on at home (wherever I may be). All are welcome. You are not expected to bring anything except your common sense & sense of humor.
'If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls-Royce would today cost $100, get one million miles to the gallon, and explode once a year, killing everyone inside.'
-Robert X. Cringely (from geek wisdom)
An autopsy on SARS-victim Adela Catalon's father showed the elder Catalon had died from pneumonia according to Health Secretary Manuel Dayrit. This is the first confirmed local transmission. Dayrit said the lungs showed bronchopneumonia, which could have been the immediate cause of death.
The first thing that comes to my mind is the corona virus and whether or not the virus was found in the autopsy (it was not mentioned in the news report). Or whether this is really SARS or regular pneumonia. However, given that this thing is being blown out of proportions, in the minds of people, it does not matter whether Philippines is 'SARS-free' or not. SARS is here and that's what matters.
Try coughing and people will look at you as if you're a carrier or something. Try calling in sick and report to work the following day. The first question they'll ask is, 'do you have SARS?'
Congressional circus II: Senator proposes to remove doorknobs or close the senate
As if one congressman's proposal to include intentional sneezing as an act of terror is not enough, this time, a senator may have expressed his concern too much over the SARS epidemic. Senator Noli De Castro asked the senate if they need to remove all the doorknobs or even close the senate. To this, Senate President Franklin Drilon declared, "I'm not taking this seriously. End of the story."
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, April 25, 2003
_____________________________________________
Congressional circus
Intentional sneezing to be included as an act of terror? Click here to get a taste of congressional circus in the Philippines. Our representatives in congress forgot to include intentional coughing, and intentional spitting on someone's face especially if the face belongs to a representative.
I've seen debates in Singapore and UK parliaments broadcasted on TV and on the web. I must admit their debates are not as 'entertaining' as ours, to say the least.
posted by Allan at 9:58 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Thursday, April 24, 2003
_____________________________________________
When international diplomacy worsens domestic politics: Arroyo's humanitarian and peacekeeping mission to Iraq
Here she goes again, making decisions with poor political and economic sense.
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on Wednesday said her decision to send humanitarian and peacekeeping forces to Iraq was about goodwill, not money, as the government would shoulder the initial expenses of the country's 500-man humanitarian mission. In her own words, "Let's not frontload the issue of money as if this were a market sale. This is about international goodwill and democracy'' (INQ7.net 23 April 2004).
So if government spends for the mission, it ceases to be a monetary issue? All the while I thought her economics is better than her politics. When people complain that money and effort should rather be spent to domestic problems such as the situation in Mindanao, that's about money. To talk in the language of economics, that's opportunity cost, loosely defined as what is given up when one decision is made over another, or in monetary terms, the benefit that the resources could have yielded if used elsewhere.
Decisions on competing uses of resources are always entangled with political issues. Arroyo would rather spend the resources to the Iraq mission than anywhere else. It wasn't enough for her that US commended her country's all out support for going to war against Iraq even without UN backing. It is as if she wants to overwhelm US with her support.
Robert Putnam, in his 1988 article 'Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games' (International Organization, 42[3], 1988: 427-460), discussed how national political leaders must come to terms with domestic and international stakeholders. While it is clear that domestic politics and international relations are often entangled, it is generally pointless to debate whether domestic politics determine international relations or the other way around. In Arroyo's case, however, it is crystal clear that her international diplomacy (or diplomatic relations with US, to be exact) is taking its toll on domestic politics.
So don't blame the President's detractors if they want to impeach her even if it's almost 2004. A colleague of mine once said, 'We get the leaders we deserve.' Maybe he's right - if, and only if, we do nothing about it.
posted by Allan at 11:28 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
_____________________________________________
How can the government of the Philippines improve compliance to the gender-responsive budgeting policy?
The question hangs in the so-called gender-circle in the Philippines for several years now. This study was completed in November 2002 in an attempt to answer the question based on a succint and no-nonsense policy analysis. The title of the paper is 'Improving Compliance to the Gender-Responsive Budgeting Policy in the Philippines: The Inside-Outside Model'. This is obviously not my usual post.
Gender-responsive budgeting in the Philippines take the form of a quota on agencies' budgets. Section 28 (or 27, it sometimes changes from year to year) of the General Appropriations Act mandates agencies, GOCCs, LGUs and other instrumentalities to utilize at least 5% of their respective budgets to programs addressing women's needs/rights. Only the Philippines uses a quota in its gender-responsive budgeting. UNDP, in its Human Development Report 2002: Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World (page 80), defines gender-responsive budgets as '…not separate budgets for women and girls. Rather, they are analyses of public spending through the lens of gender' (UNDP 2002). This definition is based on different counties’ initiatives. Not surprisingly, it does not cover Philippines’ unique 'model'.
Although the Philippines started the policy on gender-responsive budgeting earlier than most countries, compliance rate among national government agencies is low. The causes of low compliance are as follows: (1) policy ambiguity; (2) absence of sanctions; and (3) minimal involvement of civil society in the budgeting process. Low compliance is a problem because it leads to further complications, namely: (1) it perpetuates greater ambiguity in the interpretation of the policy and in the implementation process; (2) it downplays the importance of the policy; and (3) it does not achieve the main purpose of the policy, i.e., to improve the quality of life of women.
The policy alternatives are: (1) status quo; (2) independent group’s 'outside' approach; (3) bureaucracy’s 'inside' method; and (4) the 'inside-outside' model. The first alternative is the status quo, the source of the problem on low compliance. In the outside approach, a policy oriented non-government organization (NGO) conducts analysis of previous year’s budget to determine the differentiated impacts to women and men. The inside approach is done by the government agencies. Each department conducts gender analysis of the previous year’s budget, and the department heads issue statements before the budget hearings regarding the result of the analysis. The inside-outside model is a hybrid of the Australian and South African experiences. Government departments conduct the analysis, and an NGO analysis is subcontracted periodically, e.g., every three years.
The analysis shows that the policy question can be answered by revising the policy to one that directs agencies to implement an inside-outside model – in-house gender analysis supplemented by a periodical independent work from outside the government. This model addresses the main causes of low compliance. The stakeholder analysis highlights the link between performance budgeting and gender-responsive budgeting, and the need to look into the broader mandates of agencies – on how to harmonize their expertise with the evolution of the policy. The proposed solution also brings in the vital role of civil society as 'watchdogs' in a more systematic way of giving feedback to congress or to National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women (NCRFW) and using the budget analysis as a lobby tool to push for shifts in public spending that would reflect priorities of women. This feedback can only be effective if matched by a corresponding proxy for sanctions, i.e., the threat of being called to a congressional oversight committee hearing. The hearing and 'fire alarms' serve as deterrent against implementation failure.
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, April 22, 2003
_____________________________________________
Meralco asks Supreme Court to revisit ruling of its third division
In a motion filed on 16 April 2003, Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) asked the Supreme Court to modify its refund order to cover only one year instead of the four years stipulated in the original ruling. Meralco vice president Elpi Cuna said Monday that the filing of the motion was Meralco's last resort. Meralco warned that it would go bankrupt if it were to refund its customers in full, which according to its own estimates, vary from 8 to 28 billion pesos (US$ 160 million to US$ 560 million valued at US$ 1:Php 50).
In an April 9 resolution, the third division of the Supreme Court 'denied with finality' Meralco's motion for reconsideration of a decision dated Nov. 15, 2002, that found Meralco had overcharged its customers. "Public utilities cannot be allowed to overcharge at the expense of the public and worse, they cannot complain that they are not overcharging enough," the court ruled (INQ7.net 10 April 2003).
The Supreme Court is often called the 'Court of Last Resort' since decisions and resolutions issued by it with finality may no longer be appealed. Meralco lawyers may have filed the motion on the technical argument that it was the third division that issued the resolution and not the whole Supreme Court. True enough, the decision of the third division is not yet final and executory. Meralco is entitled to file a motion for reconsideration within 15 days after the decision of the third division. Meralco's motion will be deliberated by the Supreme Court en banc. Then it gets to be REALLY final.
posted by Allan at 8:25 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, April 21, 2003
_____________________________________________
Tone down the rhetoric
The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) is currently holding a Strategy Workshop on Mainstreaming the MDGs at Dusit Hotel Nikko, Makati City. Basically, the aim of the workshop is to find ways on how to do two things: (1) integrate the MDGs into the country's goals at the national and subnational levels; and (2) speed up the achievement of the MDGs to meet the goals by 2015. This is an opportunity for concerned stakeholders from government, private sector, donor organizations, and civil society to get together and strategize on how best to attain the MDGs and integrate it in national development processes. The MDGs represent our desire to move forward with a renewed commitment and undying resolve to bring people several steps closer to the specified goals and targets. It is, in essence, upholding people's right to development.
Before I turn SOUNDING BOARD into an MDG advertisement, I would like to say that we have seen all these goals before. In fact, NEDA probably can mouth the issues surrounding the MDGs anytime even without coming up with a text-heavy progress report. If you've been exposed to government reports, go ahead and pick up a report or two and compare it with the MDG report. Most probably you'll see the same banana - only this one discussing MDGs, that one discussing the President's socio-economic report, etc etc.. Technology has a way of nicely describing this process - cut and paste. Mention one goal and NEDA may already have a few paragraphs in mind to go with it.
Everything boils down to goal 8 (Develop a global partnership for development). But the way goal 8 was written, and the way it was discussed in the Philippines' progress report, I doubt if anything new will come out of this exercise.
Goal 8, like most of the goals, was vaguely written. One would expect that since this is the most critical, the targets should be very specific and will leave no room for *misinterpretation*. Well, look again.
The target on official development assistance (ODA) says: 'Address the special needs of the least developed countries (includes tarrif- and quota-free access for exports, enhanced debt-relief for HIPC and cancellation of official bilateral debt, and more generous ODA for countries committed to poverty reduction)'. Now, let's separate the shit from the bull. Donor countries and organizations can waste the whole century by merely 'addressing' the special needs of LDCs in a manner that is favorable to them. Of course there is a line enclosed in parenthesis that mentions some strategies which *may* be explored. Maybe we should be critical and ask: What does 'enhanced debt relief' means? 'More generous' ODA for countries 'committed' to poverty reduction? If donor countries and organizations are sincere in helping poor and developing countries, then it makes no economic sense to let poor and developing countries spend a great deal on debt-servicing. Debt-relief acts as a budget support by freeing funds for basic social services. It makes no economic sense, and it makes no ethical sense either.
There have been fund-related targets in the past --- 20/20 initiative, 0.7% of development countries' national income for ODA, etc etc. Every single target starts strong, attempting to bind actors to certain tasks. Quite expectedly, all of them end being written as mere 'initiatives' between consenting countries or worse, they are labeled as a toothless UN target. The MDGs are no exception.
So will the MDGs make a difference in the Philippines? I don't think so. Note that the country report says the Philippines is generally on track with respect to goals 1 to 7. The country's efforts along those lines will move on even without the MDGs. The critical goal in the MDGs is the most vague one - goal 8. The issues surrounding the achievement of this goal will not be resolved at the country level. This requires bargaining and negotiation with the donor countries and organizations. As we have seen often, the result is a 'non-binding and compromised agreement' - a phrase which implies another decade of empty promises.
SOUNDING BOARD
Friday, April 18, 2003
_____________________________________________
Mainstreaming the Millenium Development Goals: From global to country-level rhetoric
The MDGs are global goals on poverty reduction, social development and environmental regeneration, which were agreed upon by world leaders at the Millennium Summit of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2000. There are seven substantive goals and an eighth goal aimed at establishing and strengthening international partnerships for achieving the previous seven. These goals are backed up by 18 targets and 48 success indicators.
These goals should be very familiar to those who keep abreast of the goings-on in the international development circle. The MDGs are based on numerous agreements signed in international conferences during the 1990s. These agreements were stamped with the promises of the world leaders to themselves and to their peoples. Then came the MDGs in 2000. It had a reputation of being the 'mother of all summits'. It was a set of global goals stamped with the same promises given to previous international conferences.
If it did not worry you in 2000, you should be concerned now. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan sounded the alarm during the UN Day last year. He stressed that 'we are not on track... if we don't do better... we shall miss most of the goals'. In essence, the general concern was to prevent the 'mother of all summits' from becoming the 'mother of all rhetorics'.
When you read the MDGs, pay more attention to the success indicators rather than the goals and targets. The goals and targets were poorly and vaguely written such that you get a different impression from what it actually want to say. For example, the goal 'promote gender equality and empower women' only has one target --- 'eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005 and in all levels of education not later than 2015'. Then the target has success indicators on 'share of women in wage employment in non-agricultural sector' and 'proportion of seats held by women in national parliament' (in addition to the obvious male-female enrolment ratios). Other than the goal being too broad for the target, it is quite unrealistic to expect that the 'share of women in wage employment in non agri sectors' and 'proportion of women in parliament' determines whether our efforts to close the gender gap in primary and secondary education are successful or not. You would tend to hope that one thing leads to another. In reality, however, the causation is not as clear-cut as one would expect. In addition, when you have a gobal target of 'improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers' (under goal7), one doubts whether the vagueness was intended to mask the difficulty of the task.
A multisectoral Strategy Workshop on Mainstreaming the MDGs (Philippines) will be held on 21 April 2003, Dusit Hotel Nikko, Makati City. The main objective is to find ways to achieve the MDGs faster and integrate it in the country's development agenda. Philippines has recently come up with a country report assessing its performance and whether it is on track in achieving the MDGs or not. Said report will be the main document in the workshop, plus several presentations from civil society groups.
Having looked at the MDGs, and you said to yourself, 'I've seen these goals before', chances are you are suffering from a condition known as 'summit fatigue' --- a condition even more widespread than SARS. In the next few days before the forthcoming workshop, SOUNDINGBOARD will issue an analysis of the MDGs, especially in relation to the Philippines. The main question we all would want to ask is this: What difference will the MDGs make?
posted by Allan at 11:55 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Thursday, April 10, 2003
_____________________________________________
Game over
Despite the unexpected stumbling blocks that the coalition forces had to go through, the Iraqi forces were expected to give in sooner or later. And they did. Or at least that's what the coalition forces hope they are seeing right now. If, indeed, the war is over, then we are moving to a more difficult phase --- post-war reconstruction. This may be UN's last chance to get a grip on the situation. We do not want to suspect any American agenda on Iraq reconstruction, do we?
I did not see any WMD and I certainly do not want one to be released at this point. But I wonder if this basis for pursuing preemptive strike against Iraq is now being diluted amidst all the other issues. I just wonder.
posted by Allan at 10:39 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Tuesday, April 08, 2003
_____________________________________________
Re-adjusting the war plan
Johanna McGeary of Time Magazine did a special report on the three flawed assumptions on the war against Iraq: (1) there would be little resistance; (2) Iraqis will welcome the coalition with open arms; and (3) the war plan covered all contingencies. The report validated and substantiated Peter Arnett's opinion on the failure of the war plan.
Pentagon officials admitted that they underestimated the strength of Iraq's paramilitaries (Fedayeen) who were embedded behind front lines to engage in guerilla tactics to drag the war. On March 16, VP Dick Cheney said he believed they would be greeted as liberators once they moved in. It didn't happen. Paramilitaries wore civilian clothes and easily blended in the crowd. Even the doctrine of 'preemptive strike' will be politically suicidal. These civilian-clothed paramilitaries will never win the war, but they proved they can delay the advancing forces (and make the coalition forces look bad if they hit populated areas).
What does this say about the firing of Peter Arnett? It's pretty obvious, isn't it?. Arnett was recently hired by UK's Daily Mirror to continue telling the truth. Indeed, the truth will set you free.
posted by Allan at 12:06 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SARS and politics
The knee-jerk reaction from Hongkong and China to maintain a business-as-usual climate may have been smart from a self-interested and parochial (and very narrow-minded) point of view, but it definitely wasn't that smart from a global perspective.
The seemingly automatic response to turn a blind eye on the crisis and project a posture that everything is under control has proven to be more deadly in more ways than one. The most obvious was the tremendous effect on public health. Then, almost instantaneously, tourism is affected pulling down the rest of the economy.
In contrast to Hongkong and China (see previous issue), Singapore implemented a somewhat stronger approach in infection control. The "ring-fence approach", wherein the government isolates suspected victims and painstakingly retraces their steps in the days before they fell ill, seems to have worked very well. Of course, we have to undertand the political context of Singapore (not to mention its population size). In more ways than one, Singapore is always an exception to the rule. This was again proven true in the case of the way the Singapore government was able to handle infection control very well. Until today. Last night, Health Minister Lim Hng Kiang announced the bad news - seven new cases of SARS (highest daily increase in two weeks) and additional two reported deaths. Even the "ring-fence approach" is proving to be very difficult for a very mobile population.
The Government of the Philippines says the country (of 75 billion people) is SARS-free until now. I hope it remains that way, although I am not very optimistic.
I do not want to linger on "what could have beens". Clearly, a faster response could have paved the way for a quicker availability of the vaccine. Let's just hope that Hongkong, China, and the rest of the world will be able to produce the vaccine. And let's hope the virus doesn't mutate into something nastier.
posted by Allan at 10:52 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Sunday, April 06, 2003
_____________________________________________
Chinese government apologizes for slow response to SARS
The public apology was made amidst persistent efforts of the Chinese government to present a normal situation in the country, particularly in Guangdong province, where the origin of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) is currently being traced.
Thanks to internet and text messages, the Chinese people have other sources of information other than news from government-run news agencies. In a way, China is indeed getting smaller with the advent of new technologies. Under the principle what they don't know won't hurt 'em, the Chinese government can't keep its people in the dark for long. Sooner or later, people will get the information they deserve from friends and relatives around the world.
Citizens have the right to be informed. Of course, if you're in China and you don't have access to technology, you certainly would be surprised why foreigners are wearing masks. In that case, what the Chinese people don't know will definitely hurt them.
posted by Allan at 11:29 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, April 02, 2003
_____________________________________________
Do corrupt governments receive less foreign aid?
Alberto Alesina (Harvard University) and Beatrice Weder (University of Basel) came up with Working Paper 7108 entitled "Do Corrupt Governments Receive Less Foreign Aid" under the National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series which was subsequently published in the September 2002 issue of the American Economic Review. It was also featured in Mark
Thornton's 19 November 2002 article in the Mises.org.
A loud NO. That's the answer of the Alberto Alesina and Beatrice Weder. Basing their analysis on international economic statistics and surveys on corruption across countries, the authors find that there is no evidence that indeed less corrupt governments receive more foreign aid.
Let's probe deeper.
Off the cuff, one may challenge the authors' findings by saying that more corrupt countries receive more aid because donors may be trying to help them improve governance. In fact, the authors recognize that measures of corruption are highly correlated to other characteristics of countries (e.g., poverty and poor institutional development), which may be targeted by donors. When matched with the rhetoric (of donors) that aid works best when "allocated in an environment where there are good policies and good institutions in place..." (see page 4 of press briefing on Assessing Aid: What Works, What Doesn't, and Why), the authors, however, find it hard to argue that foreign aid should go to more corrupt countries to reduce corruption. But when they controlled for several other determinants of aid (correlated to corruption), they find a surprising result: more corrupt governments receive more foreign aid than less corrupt ones.
The next step is to ask the nasty question: why do more corrupt governments receive more foreign aid than less corrupt ones (even after controlling for other determinants of aid)? Although evidences are not so clear cut (and the authors even admitted this), one may think that donors may not have been paying critical attention to the soundness of governance in aid-receiving countries. Of course, the paper was done in 1999. Multilateral and bilateral donors may have already made strides in concretizing the rhetoric that aid works best in an environment with good policies and good institutions in place. Or am I just being naive?
posted by Allan at 5:35 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
