Why the Philippines Failed?

… In Why Nations Fail, economists Acemoglu and Robinson provide a brilliant explanation on how progress and development is largely a function of ‘inclusive’ — as opposed to extractive — governance. Using their dichotomy, the Philippines clearly falls within the extractive category, whereby the core-elite have blocked appropriate policies, which would have made the country a true democracy, anchored by a large middle class, an entrepreneurial sector, and strong institutions spurring growth and innovation. Therefore, in many ways, the developmental failure of the Philippines has something to do with its weak and divided state, which seldom had the right ‘policy space’ to make optimal economic decisions. Throughout the post-War period, the Philippine state has either been at the mercy of entrenched elites, pushing for particularistic interests and blocking policies/legislations aimed at national development, or international financial institutions (IFIs), which have prescribed counterproductive policies, notably ‘Structural Adjustment Programs’ (SAPs), causing tremendous poverty, social dislocation, agricultural decline and ‘de-industrialization’ across the developing world. Sometimes, the Philippines was at the mercy of both...

~ Richard Javad Heydarian


      • mb, how can you make many billionaires?

        I’m sure natural sa mga mayayaman na protektahan sarili. Maski ako kung ako mayaman, I’ll try to insulate myself and protect my wealth, but does government have to be occupied by rich families. Kailangan pa ba ng mahihirap na umalsa? Gamitin nalang natin utak natin.

        For example, why make pasipsip when one can do your best, without risking one’s own skin (this is possible) to chip away the old power.