Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Email us Follow us on Twitter Watch us on Youtube SiteMap •  Links  • jobs@nscb.gov.phDo Business With Us 

SexyStats

 

Looking at our countrys national income during the first quarter of 2013, increasing at 7.1 percent in real terms, might point to an overwhelming sentiment among consumers that more household consumption spending for our basic needs was evident.

Understanding Income as measured
from GDP, GNI and NDI
by Jose Ramon G. Albert, Ph.D 1                                        Filipino version


It’s More Fun to be a Statistician!Almost a month ago, the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) released the Report on the Performance of the Economy for the First Quarter of 2013. In this report, we mentioned that the country posted 7.8 percent growth in the first quarter of 2013. The main driver of the first quarter growth in the production side was services growing at 7.0 percent, and this was supported by industry at 10.9 percent growth and agriculture at 3.3 percent.  On the expenditure side, increased consumer and government spending, accompanied by higher investment in construction, were the main contributors to growth (Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4).

Looking at our country’s national income during the first quarter of 2013, increasing at 7.1 percent in real terms, might point to an overwhelming sentiment among consumers – that more household consumption spending for our basic needs was evident. With higher income, there would be increased spending, e.g. spending for food, clothing & footwear, housing, furnishings, health, transport, communication, education, and other miscellaneous services (Tables 5, 6, 7 and 8)?   From estimates of household final consumption expenditures for the First Quarter of 2013, among Filipinos, the top five highest spending items  (in real terms) were communications (8.3 percent), restaurants and hotels (7.5 percent), recreation and culture (7.1 percent) other miscellaneous services like personal services, etc. (6.7 percent).

As we have pointed out in the past, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Gross National Income (GNI) are measures of economic progress. They do not necessarily measure welfare and development, although many economists would agree that economic growth is necessary but not sufficient for improved welfare.  A number of people have asked us very interesting questions about the GDP and GNI. One of them is “with the 7.8 percent growth of GDP and 7.1 percent growth of GNI, is everyone getting a fair share of the country’s income?”  Another is “should higher GDP and GNI bring higher compensation/income received, which, in turn, can translate to higher disposable income among households?” Most importantly, it is interesting to know “what is the effect of higher GDP and higher GNI in various groups in the population e.g. high income, middle income and low income classes?”

Before we commence answering these questions, let us define GDP and GNI from a layman’s viewpoint. The GDP figure that we release at the NSCB represents the value of all goods and services produced within the domestic territory for the specific period of time.  The GDP can also be related with the goods and services which go to consumption, to investments, including those that go to exports less the country’s imports.

Similarly, the term GNI, formerly termed as the Gross National Product (GNP), also refers to income derived from production of goods and services. But this production is not only those produced in the country but also those produced outside the country. 

The growth of GDP and GNI denotes the performance of the entire economy at the macro level. It should be impressed that economic growth as measured by the GDP/GNI does not always translate to a better life for everybody, especially as such growth is not necessarily uniformly spread. In fact, GDP/GNI figures do not show the distribution of income and the uneven spread of financial wealth.

For this article, we will present comparison of available statistics that will show some trends on GDP and GNI and some relevant derived statistics.

GDP and GNI

During the first quarter of 2013, with our country’s  population estimated at 96.8 million, each individual has a per capita income (GDP) generated within the domestic economy of P27,454.  If we discount the inflation or the effect of prices, the total income of each individual generated in the economy would be P16,546 in 2000 prices.  On the average, this income is increasing by 7.2 percent on a quarterly basis. (Table 10).

If income coming from abroad by residents (GNI) is accounted for, each individual will get even higher income at P32,768, in current prices, and P19,629 in 2000 prices (Table 10). These indicators on per capita income, whether from GDP or GNI, simply show how much each Filipino is sharing from the country’s total income if all these income is equally spread across the population, and would not actually show details of income inequality or disparity.

Disposable Income

In 2010, the net disposable income (NDI) or the total income ready for spending by Pinoys was estimated at P11.040 billion. This figure is not far from GDP at P9.003 billion and the GNI at P10.852 billion. This means that the amount of income ready for spending by Filipinos is only 1.7 percent higher than those income reported in the GNI.

Even in 2011, the trend did not change much. GDP for 2011 was P9.706 billion, GNI at P11.598 billion (Table 1) and Disposable Income at P11.879 billion (Table 9). Again, the rate of increase between GNI and Disposable Income is at 2.4 percent, slightly higher from last year’s 1.7 percent.   Note that estimates on disposable income was sourced from the 2011 annual report of the NSCB’s Consolidated Accounts and Income and Outlay which is expected to change when updated data are released on 03 July 2013.

Incomes by Income Classes 2

Although the NSCB Technical Staff attempted to define income classes in the last National Convention on Statistics using per capita incomes sourced from the triennial Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES), conducted by the National Statistics Office, I would prefer to examine income classes in a simple way, and also make use of the official poverty lines.  Consider defining the low income group as those families whose per capita incomes are at most twice the poverty line, the middle income class as those families with per capita incomes between twice and ten times the poverty line, and the high income group as those families making more than ten times the poverty line.

Consider estimating the number of persons by income class, as well as the share of income accruing to these classes from the 2006 and 2009 FIES.  Now, let us use these information, to generate per capita income by income class from the GDP, GNI and NDI. We find that those from high income classes, have incomes rising much faster than those in the middle and low income class. While the high income class comprises only 15.1-15.9 percent of the total population, the share of the income to national income is about three fifths.   The growth in the incomes of the upper income class by GDP is at 10.9 percent, GNI at 9.9 percent, and the NDI at 10.6 percent, while in contrast the growth in the middle income group is 4.3 percent, 3.4 percent and 4.1 percent, respectively for GDP, GNI and NDI (Table 12). While such an examination of income is rather simplistic, it points to issues about income inequality, and the need for government and society to address these disparities, and ensure a path toward inclusive growth.

Per Capita GDP 3 by ASEAN Country

In 2011, among the 10 ASEAN member states (AMS), the Philippines ranked 6th in terms of per capita GDP at 4,119 measured in international US dollars. As expected, Singapore, Brunei Darussalam and Malaysia top the list with per capita GDP of 60,688, 51,760 and 16,051 respectively. These were followed by Thailand at 8,646 and Indonesia with 4,636.  Viet Nam's per capita GDP was 3,412 (Table 13 and Figure 1).

However, in terms of the growth rate of per capita GDP, the top three countries showed conservative increases: Singapore's growth is at 5.0 percent, Brunei at 2.7 percent and Malaysia at 5.7 percent.   Comparably, Indonesia grew by 7.7 percent and Viet Nam at 7.1 percent. The Philippines per capita GDP moderately grew by 4.4 percent while Thailand grew by 1.7 percent.

Per capital GDP as shown here is based on purchasing power parity (PPP), that is, GDP in international dollars reflecting relative value of currencies accounting for cost of living differences across countries.

Wealth Accounting

After our discussion of income generated out of GDP and GNI, let us point out that there are limitations regarding income accounts. GDP and GNI, even on a per capita basis, are not meant to measure welfare. This is why we yield poverty statistics. In addition, wealth, both produced and non-produced wealth, needs to be measured in order to determine if we can sustain the income generated from production.  The GDP and GNI do not measure wealth. Nonetheless, we, at the NSCB, have attempted to account for our natural resources – forest, fishes, trees, land including the recording of our clean air, clean water and clean soil. Through a project supported by the United Nations Development Program in the mid-nineties, we obtained pilot estimates to provide an indication of environmentally adjusted GDP, which is currently being referred to as “Green GDP”. This figure provides an indication on the true growth of the economy, after having accounted for the depleted forest, overfishing, degraded land including polluted air, water and soil.  Such an exercise was done on a pilot basis simply to explore whether the Philippine Statistical System (PSS) was ready that time to come up with a better measure of GDP. Unfortunately, these efforts were not sustained after the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) did not act on the Executive Order 406 signed by then President Fidel V. Ramos, that is, institutionalizing the Philippine Economic-Environmental and Natural Resources Accounting (PEENRA) System, which involved establishing units within the NSCB, National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), and the Department of Natural and Environment Resources (DENR). With the current renewed interest in environmental accounting, efforts are now underway toward Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES), supported by the World Bank. This new task for environmental accounting is being spearheaded by NEDA, with cooperation from NSCB, DENR and DBM.

Final Words

A number of people have been noted that economic growth has not yet translated into poverty reduction.  This is the main challenge being faced not only by government but by the entire country.  Official statistics in the PSS are telling us a story, and we, as a people, are supposed to reflect on what these numbers mean. Blaming will get us nowhere. It is concerted action of government and the private sector that will ensure that growth becomes inclusive.  We seem to be in a hurry to find changes, but changes take time.  Speaking of changes, the PSS will be undergoing some changes.  Last June 6, 2013, the Senate and the House jointly passed a bill, which was certified by the President as urgent, to reorganize the PSS. Staff of major statistical agencies in the PSS engaged in primary data collection and compilation of data, viz., the NSCB, NSO, Bureau of Agricultural Statistics, and the Bureau of Labor and Employment Statistics will be merged into one body, to be called the “Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).”    In addition, the research and training arm of the PSS will be strengthened into the Philippine Statistical Research and Training Institute from the current Statistical Research and Training Center.  It is our hope that the new PSA will live up to expectations of all stakeholders of the PSS that we will have “Better Statistics for a Better Philippines.”  (http://www.nscb.gov.ph/statfocus/2013 /SF_062013_PP1_PSS.asp)

_______________________

Reactions and views are welcome thru email to the author at jrg.albert@nscb.gov.ph

 

 

Filipino Version

 

Pag-unawa ng Kita na Sinukat mula sa GDP, GNI at NDI 
Ni Jose Ramon G. Albert, Ph.D.1

Halos isang buwan na ang nakararaan nang inilathala ng National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) ang ulat tungkol sa kalagayan o takbo ng ekonomiya para sa unang tatlong buwan ng 2013.  Sa nabanggit na ulat, ipinahayag namin na nakapagtala ang bansa ng 7.8 porsyentong paglago sa unang tatlong buwan ng 2013.  Ang pangunahing nagdala sa paglagong ito sa panig ng produksyon ay ang Services na lumago ng 7.0 porsyento at sinuportahan ng Industry na may 10.9 porsyento at agrikultra na may 3.3 porsyento.  Kapag tinignan ang ating pinagkagastusan, ang mataas na paggastos ng mga consumer at ng gobyerno kasama na ang pamumuhunan sa construction ang mga pangunahing nagdala ng paglago ng ekonomiya (Table 1, 2, 3 at 4).

Kung titingnan ang pambansang kita nitong unang tatlong buwan ng 2013 na tumaas ng 7.1 porsyento sa tunay o real terms, tututungo ito sa sentimiento sa hanay ng mga consumer na – mas litaw ang gastusing pangsambahayan para sa batayang mga pangangailangan.  Pagtumaas ang kita, may kaalinsabay na pagtaas ng paggastos, halimbawa, paggastos para sa pagkain, pananamit at footwear, pabahay, pangkalusugan, transportasyon, komunikasyon, edukasyon at iba pang serbisyo (Table 5, 6, 7 at 8)?  Mula sa pagtantya ng pinal na gastusing pangsambahayan para sa unang tatlong buwan ng 2013, ang limang pangunahing pinagkakagastusan (sa real terms) ng mga Pilipino ay ang komunikasyon (8.3 porsyento), restaurants and hotels (7.5 porsyento), recreation and culture (7.1 porsyento), iba pang mga samu’t saring serbisyo tulad ng personal services, atbp (6.7 porsyento).

Tulad ng nabanggit na namin noon, ang kabuuang local na produkto o Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at kabuuang pambansang kita o Gross National Income (GNI) ay mga panukat ng pag-unlad ng ekonomiya. Hindi nito sinusukat ang kapakanang panlipunan at kaunlaran bagama’t maraming ekonomista ang sasang ayon na ang paglago ng ekonomiya ay kailangan pero hindi sapat para mapabuti ang kapakanang panlipunan. Ilan na ring tao ang nagtatanong sa amin ng mga interesanteng mga kakatanungan ukol sa GDP at GNI.  Isa sa kanila ay “sa 7.8 porsyentong paglago ng GDP at sa 7.1 porsyentong paglago ng GNI, lahat ba ay nakakahuha ng patas na parte sa kita ng bansa?” Ang isa pa ay “makapagbibigay ba ng mas mataas na kabayaran/kita ang GDP/GNI at ito ba’y maisasalin sa mas mataas na gastusing kita o disposable income ng sambahayan o household?  Ang mas mahalaga at interesanteng malaman ay “ano ang epekto ng mas mataas na GDP at mataas na GNI sa iba’t iba grupo o hanay sa ating populasyon, halimbawa ang may mataas na kita, nasa gitna at mababang kita?”

Bago namin sagutin ang mga katanungang ito, alamin muna natin ang kahulugan ng GDP at GNI sa pananaw ng isang karaniwang tao. Ang inilabas naming mga numero ng GDP ay naglalarawan ng halaga ng lahat ng mga produkto’t serbisyong gawa sa loob ng teritoryo ng Pilipinas sa isang takdang panahon.  Ang GDP ay maaari ding iugnay sa mga produkto’t serbisyo na napupunta sa mga gastusin, sa pamumuhunan kasama na yaong napupunta sa ating netong eksport (eksport bawas ang import).

Ang GNI, na ang tawag dati’y Gross National Product (GNP) o kabuuang pambansang produkto, ay tumutukoy din sa kita mula sa paggawa ng produkto’t serbisyo pero ang saklaw nito ay di lang yaong gawa sa loob ng teritoryo ng Pilipinas kundi pati na yaong produkto’t serbisyong gawa sa labas ng teritoryo ng Pilipinas sa isang takdang panahon.

Ang paglago ng GDP at GNI ay sumasalamin sa paggana o kalagayan ng buong ekonomya sa masaklaw na antas.  Pagkatandaan natin na ang paglago ng ekonomiya batay sa panukat na GDP/GNI ay hindi nangangahulugan ng matiwasay na kabuhayan para sa lahat lalo na’t ang paglago ay hindi naman naikakalat ng pantay-pantay.  Sa katunayan, ang mga numerong pinakikita ng GDP/GNI ay hindi naglalarawan ng pagbahagi ng kita at ng di pantay na kalat ng yamang pinansyal.

Para sa artikulong ito, ilalatag namin ang paghahambing ng mga naisapublikong estadistika na maglalarawan ng takbo ng GDP at GNI at ilang halaw na mga importanteng estadistika.

GDP at GNI

Noong unang tatlong buwan ng 2013, ang populasyon ng natin sa bansa ay umabot sa 96.8 milyon, at ang bawat indibidwal ay masasabing may per capita income (GDP) na makukuha sa local na ekonomiya na P27,454.  Kung aalisin natin ang epekto ng pagtaas ng presyo ng bilihin o inflation, ang kabuuang kita ng bawat indibidwal mula sa ekonomiya ay P16,546 sa presyo noong 2000.  Sa karaniwan, ang kitang ito ay tumaas ng 7.2 porsyento sa batayang quarterly (Table 10).

Kung ang kita mula sa labas ng bansa ng mga residente (GNI) ay isasama, ang bawat indibidwal ay makakakuha ng mas mataas na kita na P32,768, sa kasalukuyang presyo, at P19,629 sa presyo noong 2000 (Table 10). Ang mga estadistikang ito ng per capita income, mula man sa GDP o GNI, ay nagpapakita lamang ng kung gaano kalaki ang bahagi ng bawat Pilipino sa kabuuang kita ng bansa kung ang kitang ito ay ibabahagi ng pantay pantay sa buong populasyon at hindi talaga magpapakita ng detalye ng di pagkakapantay pantay ng kita o di pagkakapareho.

Pwedeng Gastusing Kita

Noong 2010, ang netong gastusing kita o net disposable income (NDI) o ang kabuuang kita na pwedeng gastusin ng mga Pinoy ay aabot sa P11.040 bilyon.  Ang numerong ito ay di malayo sa GDP na P9.003 bilyon at sa GNI na P10.852 bilyon.  Ibig sabihin, ang kita ng mga Pilipino na pwedeng gastusin ay aabot lamang sa 1.7 porsyento mataas kaysa sa nailulat na kita sa GNI.
Kahit noong 2011, ang takbong ito ay di nagbago ng malaki.  Ang GDP noong 2011 ay P9.706 bilyon, GNI ay P11.598 bilyon (Table 1) at Disposable Income ay P11.879 bilyon (Table 9).  Sa muli, ang tantos ng pagtaas sa pagitan ng GNI at Disposable Income ay nasa 2.4 porsyento, mas mataas ng kaunti kaysa noong isang taon na 1.7 porsyento.  Tandaan natin na ang tantyang Disposable Income ay nagmula sa 2011 taunang ulat ng NSCB Consolidated Accounst at Income and Outlay na inaasahan magbabago kapag dumating na mga bagong datos at ilalabas ngayon katapusan ng Hulyo 3, 2013.

Kita ng Bawat Income Class2

Bagamat nagtangka ang NSCB Technical Staff na bigyang kahulugan ang mga income classes noong nakaraang National Convention on Statistics gamit ang per capita income mula sa Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) na isinagawa ng National Statistics Office kada tatlong taon, mas nanaisin kong suriin ang mga income classes sa isang payak na paraan at gamitin ang opisyal na poverty lines.  Sabihin na natin na ang grupo ng low income ay yaong mga pamilya na may per capita income na di tataas sa doble kaysa poverty line, ang middle income class ay yaong mga pamilya na may per capita income sa pagitan ng doble at sampung beses na mataas kaysa poverty line, at ang grupo ng high income naman ay yaong mga pamilya na may per capita income na mahigit sa sampung beses kaysa poverty line.

Bigyan nating pansin ang pagtantya sa bilang ng mga tao batay sa income class at sa bahagi ng naiulat na kabuuang kitang napupunta sa mga income class mula sa 2006 at 2009 FIES.  Ngayon, gamitin natin ang mga sumusunod na impormasyon ito para makakuha ng pagtantya ng per capita income batay sa income class mula sa GDP, GNI at NDI.  Mapapansin natin na ang mga nasa high income class ay may kita na mabilis na tumataas kaysa sa middle income at lower income class.  Bagamat ang high income class ay bumubuo lamang ng 15.1 – 15.9 porsyento ng kabuuang populasyon, ang bahagi ng kita nila ay aabot halos 60 porsyento ng pambansang kita.  Ang paglago ng kita ng mga nasa high income class sa GDP ay nasa 10.9 porsyento, sa GNI 9.9.porsyento, at sa NDI 10.6 porsyento habang ang paglago naman ng kita mula sa mga nasa middle income ay 4.3 porsyento, 3.4 porsyento at 4.1 porsyento, ayon sa pagkasunod-sunod, para sa GDP, GNI and NDI (Table 12).  Habang ang pagsusuring ito ay medyo simple lang, pinakikita nito ang isyu tungkol sa di pagkapantay-pantay ng kita sa bansa at ang pangangailangan na dapat bigyan pansin ng pamahalaan at ng lipunan ang ganitong di pagkakapantay-pantay at para matiyak ang pagtahak sa landas tungo sa lahatang panig na paglago o inclusive growth.

Per Capita GDP 3 ng mga Bansang Kasapi ng ASEAN

Tingnan naman natin ang lagay ng Pilipinas kung ikukumpara sa mga miyembro ng ASEAN sa tuntuning per capita GDP na sinukat sa US dollar.  Tulad ng inaasahan, ang Singapore, Brunei Darussalam at Malaysia ang tatlong nangungunang bansa na nagpapakita ng pinakamataas na per capita GDP sa US dollar.  Halimbawa, noong 2011, ang per capita GDP ng Singapore ay 60,888, ang Brunei, 51,700 at ang Malaysia, 16,051.  Ang per capita ng Pilipinas ay mababa at nasa 4,119 at kahanay ng Indonesia na may 4,636 at Vietnam na may 3,412 (Table 13 and Figure 1).

Ganumpaman, sa tuntunin ng tantos ng paglago ng per capita GDP, ang tatlong nangungunang bansa ay nagpapakita ng conserbatibong pagtaas.  Ang paglago ng Singapore ay 5.0 porsyento, Brunei ay 2.7 porsyento at Malaysia sa 5.7 porsyento.  Ang susunod ng grupo ay nagpapakita ng mas mataas na paglago - ang Indonesia ay lumago ng 7.7 poryento at ang Vietnam ay 7.1 porsyento.  Samanatala, ang per capita GDP ng Pilipinas ay lumago ng 4.4 porsyento halos kalahati kung ikukumpara sa Indonesia at Vietnam.

Ang pinakikitang per capita GDP ay batay sa purchasing power parity (PPP) na kung saan ang GDP ay isinalin sa dolyar batay sa pagkakaiba ng mga ginagamit na currency at pagkakaiba ng presyo ng mga bilihin sa mga bansa.

Ang Pagtutuos sa Yaman ng Pilipinas

May mga limitasyon ang natalakay nating kita na nagmumula sa GDP at GNI lalo na pagdating sa pagtutuos ng kita. Ang GDP at GNI, kahit sa batayang per capita, ay hindi panukat ng kagalingan o kapakanan. Kaya nga ba’t meron din tayong estadistika ng kahirapan.  Dagdag pa, ang yaman, likas at di likas, ay nangangailangang sukatin para malaman natin kung mapapanatili natin ang kita mula sa produksyon.  Hindi sinusukat ng GDP at GNI ang yaman ng isang bansa. Kaya nga ba nagtangka ang NSCB na sukatin din ang ating likas na yaman – kagubatan, mga isda, mga puno, kalupaan kasama na ang pagtala sa malinis ng hangin, tubig at kalupaan.  Sa pamamagitan ng isang proyekto na pinondohan ng United Nations Development Programme noong dekada 90, nakuha namin ang panimulang patutuos na nagbibigay indikasyon ng isang environmentally adjusted GDP na kung tagurian ngayon ay “Green GDP.”  Ang nabanggit na mga numero ay nagbibgay indikasyon ng totoong paglago ng ekonomiya matapos matantya ang pagkaubos ng ating kagubatan, sobrang pangingisda, pagkasira sa lupa kasama na ang polusyon ng hangin, tubig at kalupaan.  Ang ganitong panimulang pagtutuos ay para matanto ng Philippine Statistical System (PSS) kung handa na nga ba tayo para sa isang mas mahusay ng panukat ng GDP.Ang nabanggit na pagtutuos ay di nga lamang naituloy dahil di nabigyan ng pondo ng Department of Budget and Management (DBM) kahit pa nilagdaan ng pangulong Fidel V. Ramos ang Executive Order 406, ang Institutionalization of the Philippine Economic-Environmental and Natural Resources Accounting (PEENRA) System na kung saan magbubuo ng mga yunit sa NSCB, National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) at Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).  Sa muling pagkakaroon ng interes sa environmental accounting, may mga hakbangin na tungo sa Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) na suportado ng World Bank.  Ang panibagong gawaing ito sa environmental accounting ay pinangungunahan ng NEDA sa pakikipagtulungan ng NSCB, DENR at DBM.

Huling Pananalita

Napansin ng ilang tao na ang pagsibol o paglago ng ekonomiya ay di pa humahantong sa pagbawas ng kahirapan.  Ito ang hamong kinakaharap di lamang ng gobyernon kundi ng buong bansa.  Ang opisyal na estadistika ng PSS ay nagkwekwento sa atin, at tayo, bilang mamayang Pilipino, ay dapat magmunimuni sa mga kahulugan ng mga numerong ito. Ang paninisi ay walang kahahantungan.  Ang pinagsamang aksyon ng gobyerno at pribadong sector ang mag titiyak na ang paglago ay lahatang panig. Tila baga nagmamadali tayo na makahanap ng pagbabago ngunit ang pagbabago ay di daglian.  Kung pag-uusapan ang pagbabago, magkakaroon ng mga pagbabago sa PSS.  Noong Hunyo 6, 2013, inaprubahan ng ng Senado at kongreso ang isang panukalang batas, na sinertipikahan urgent ng Pangulo, ang reorganisasyon ng PSS.  Lahat ng staff ng mga mayor na ahensyang pang estadistika na sangkot sa pangangalap at pagcompile ng mga datos, tulad ng NSCB, NSO, Bureau of Agricultural Statistics (BAS) at Bureau of Labor and Employment Statistics (BLES) ay pag-iisahin na bilang isang ahensya na tatawaging “Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).”  Dagdag pa, ang research and training arm ng PSS ay palalakasin bilang Philippine Statistical Research and Training Institute mula sa kasalukuyang Statistical Research and Training Center.  Inaasahan na gagawin ng bagong PSA ang lahat ng kanyang makakayanan para matuwa ang mga stakeholders ng PSS at masiguro na tayo’y magkaroon ng Mas Mahusay na Estadistika Para sa Mas Mahusay na Pilipinas. (Tingnan sa: http://www.nscb.gov.ph/statfocus/2013/SF_062013_PP1_PSS.asp#filversion)

Kung kayo ay may reaksyon o ibang pananaw ukol sa artikulong ito, mangyari lamang na sumulat sa may akda sa email address na:jrg.albert@nscb.gov.ph.

1Secretary General of the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB). The NSCB, a statistical agency functionally attached to the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), is the highest policy making and coordinating body on statistical matters in the Philippines. Immediately prior to his appointment at NSCB, Dr. Albert was a Senior Research Fellow at the Philippine Institute for Development Studies, a policy think tank attached to NEDA. Dr. Albert finished summa cum laude with a Bachelor of Science degree in Applied Mathematics from the De La Salle University in 1988. He completed a Master of Science in Statistics from the State University of New York at Stony Brook in 1989 and a Ph.D. in Statistics from the same university in 1993. He is a Professorial Lecturer at the Decision Sciences and Innovation Department of Ramon V. Del Rosario College of Business, De La Salle University. He is also a past President of the Philippine Statistical Association, a Fellow of the Social Weather Stations, and an Elected Regular Member of the National Research Council of the Philippines.

This article was co-written by Vivian R. Ilarina , Division Chief of  Expenditure Accounts Division, Economic Statistics Office of the NSCB. This article was translated in Filipino by Mr. Edward Eugenio P. Lopez Dee of NSCB. The authors thank Dir. Candido J. Astrologo, Jr., Edward Eugenio P. Lopez-Dee, Ms. Mechelle M. Viernes, Ms. Irene T. Talam and Ms. Simonette A. Nisperos for the assistance on special statistical computations and preparation of statistical tables.   The views expressed in the article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NSCB and its Technical Staff.

2 Low Income Class Families are those with income below 2 times the annual per capita poverty threshold ; Middle Income Class Families are those with income between 2 to 10 times the annual per capita poverty threshold ; and High Income Class Families are those with income greater than 10 times the annual per capita poverty threshold

3 GDP per capita based on purchasing power parity (PPP). PPP GDP is gross domestic product converted to international dollars using purchasing power parity rates. An international dollar has the same purchasing power over GDP as the U.S. dollar has in the United States. GDP at purchaser's prices is the sum of gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. Data are in current international dollars.



comments powered by Disqus

Table 1. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME AND GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013 and Annual 2011-2012
At Current Prices
(In million pesos)

 

     INDUSTRY/GDP/ GNI 2011 2012 2013 Annual 
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011 2012
1. AGRI., HUNTING, FORESTRY AND FISHING 310,437 289,413 275,366 359,797 301,616 287,836 288,250 372,915 310,076 1,235,013 1,250,616
2. INDUSTRY  731,854 750,711 695,033 864,461 779,722 800,122 746,936 957,727 865,333 3,042,060 3,284,508
3. SERVICE  1,197,706 1,384,189 1,357,281 1,490,019 1,336,453 1,535,275 1,519,417 1,638,617 1,481,168 5,429,196 6,029,762
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 2,239,997 2,424,313 2,327,680 2,714,277 2,417,791 2,623,234 2,554,604 2,969,258 2,656,578 9,706,268 10,564,886
GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 2,697,771 2,901,344 2,783,536 3,215,553 2,902,570 3,150,730 3,055,218 3,500,212 3,170,782 11,598,205 12,608,730

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

Table 2. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME AND GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013 and Annual 2011-2012
At Constant Prices
(In million pesos)

 

     INDUSTRY 2011 2012 2013 Annual 
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011 2012
1. AGRI., HUNTING, FORESTRY AND FISHING 170,615 160,915 152,195 196,110 172,560 161,887 158,826 205,664 178,340 679,835 698,937
2. INDUSTRY 454,771 481,033 446,150 511,302 478,924 508,847 477,887 556,965 530,994 1,893,256 2,022,623
3. SERVICE 768,594 857,966 823,874 885,474 833,337 923,948 889,910 942,916 891,676 3,335,909 3,590,111
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 1,393,979 1,499,915 1,422,219 1,592,887 1,484,821 1,594,682 1,526,622 1,705,545 1,601,010 5,909,000 6,311,671
GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 1,677,571 1,780,711 1,689,510 1,892,155 1,773,874 1,896,869 1,812,871 2,012,932 1,899,364 7,039,948 7,496,546

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 3. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME AND GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013, Annual 2011-2012
Growth Rates At Current Prices
(In Percent)

 

     INDUSTRY 2011 - 2012 2012-13 Annual 
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011-2012
1. AGRI., HUNTING, FORESTRY AND FISHING -2.8 -0.5 4.7 3.6 2.8 1.3
2. INDUSTRY  6.5 6.6 7.5 10.8 11.0 8.0
3. SERVICE  11.6 10.9 11.9 10.0 10.8 11.1
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 7.9 8.2 9.7 9.4 9.9 8.8
GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 7.6 8.6 9.8 8.9 9.2 8.7

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 4. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME AND GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013 , Annual 2011-2012
Growth Rates At Constant Prices
(In Percent)

 

     INDUSTRY 2011 - 2012 2012-13 Annual 
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011-2012
1. AGRI., HUNTING, FORESTRY AND FISHING 1.1 0.6 4.4 4.9 3.3 2.8
2. INDUSTRY 5.3 5.8 7.1 8.9 10.9 6.8
3. SERVICE  8.4 7.7 8.0 6.5 7.0 7.6
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 6.5 6.3 7.3 7.1 7.8 6.8
GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 5.7 6.5 7.3 6.4 7.1 6.5

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 5. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013 and Anuual 2011-2012
At Current Prices
(In million pesos)

 

   EXPENDITURE GROUP 2011 2012 2013 Annual 
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011 2012
HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION    EXPENDITURE 1,636,517 1,779,604 1,708,542 2,007,918 1,822,169 1,927,142 1,881,260 2,207,309 1,977,105 7,132,581 7,837,881
1.   Food and Non-alcoholic beverages 667,787 756,145 721,004 908,411 748,323 822,849 781,377 990,879 798,168 3,053,347 3,343,427
2.   Alcoholic beverages, Tobacco 18,390 22,778 23,042 27,561 20,210 25,317 24,694 30,709 21,061 91,770 100,930
3.   Clothing and Footwear 22,523 26,461 24,738 27,164 23,942 29,042 26,742 28,766 26,647 100,886 108,492
4.   Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 208,805 228,446 218,280 223,797 229,775 245,808 245,784 244,387 249,820 879,328 965,753
5.   Furnishings, household equipment and routine household maintenance 68,001 79,288 64,039 80,575 71,401 83,332 71,573 83,942 78,317 291,903 310,249
6.   Health 40,598 39,994 48,583 44,270 47,174 47,033 56,696 48,918 50,052 173,444 199,821
7.   Transport 187,764 200,928 192,965 188,776 209,921 208,178 217,857 201,613 230,321 770,433 837,569
8.   Communication 57,636 58,269 47,848 61,604 62,881 63,688 52,996 68,381 68,478 225,358 247,946
9.   Recreation and culture 27,334 30,231 30,642 41,398 32,370 32,473 32,595 45,413 35,413 129,605 142,851
10. Education 64,398 66,858 71,609 79,951 69,035 72,170 77,059 84,509 76,628 282,816 302,772
11. Restaurants and hotels 63,395 57,889 67,166 75,273 72,144 63,505 73,614 82,198 81,306 263,723 291,460
12. Miscellaneous goods and services 209,887 212,317 198,627 249,138 234,994 233,748 220,274 297,595 260,894 869,969 986,611

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 6. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE
1ST QUARTER 2010 TO 1ST QUARTER 2013 and Annual 2011-2012
AT CONSTANT PRICES
(In million pesos)

 

   EXPENDITURE GROUP 2011 2012 2013 Annual 
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011 2012
HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION    EXPENDITURE 969,538 1,025,090 985,430 1,188,852 1,035,983 1,092,699 1,051,037 1,262,804 1,089,250 4,168,910 4,442,523
1.   Food and Non-alcoholic beverages 387,865 424,185 420,114 521,857 415,826 456,658 439,410 547,877 438,211 1,754,021 1,859,770
2.   Alcoholic beverages, Tobacco 12,261 15,308 14,011 18,251 12,853 16,202 14,895 19,365 12,561 59,831 63,316
3.   Clothing and Footwear 16,520 18,948 17,457 19,780 16,932 19,810 17,960 19,954 17,473 72,706 74,655
4.   Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 114,720 120,844 107,110 116,156 120,551 124,655 117,977 122,760 120,933 458,829 485,943
5.   Furnishings, household equipment and routine household maintenance 55,909 65,753 52,126 64,460 57,397 66,833 55,829 65,160 60,029 238,248 245,219
6.   Health 22,060 21,642 25,097 23,328 24,936 24,641 28,405 25,006 25,618 92,126 102,988
7.   Transport 87,092 92,136 79,347 85,999 92,250 93,242 88,958 90,218 98,110 344,575 364,667
8.   Communication 54,079 55,381 45,530 60,298 58,717 60,487 50,281 66,558 63,575 215,288 236,043
9.   Recreation and culture 20,178 22,314 21,311 30,038 23,337 23,514 23,433 32,115 24,985 93,841 102,399
10. Education 30,911 31,646 33,076 39,221 31,623 32,630 34,082 39,683 33,634 134,854 138,018
11. Restaurants and hotels 41,501 38,800 42,507 48,606 45,804 41,231 45,106 51,518 49,257 171,414 183,659
12. Miscellaneous goods and services 126,441 118,134 127,745 160,858 135,756 132,796 134,702 182,590 144,865 533,178 585,844

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 7. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013, Annual 2011-2012
Growth Rates At Current Prices
(In Percent)

 

   EXPENDITURE GROUP 2011-2012 2012-2013 Annual 
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011-2012
HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE 11.3 8.3 10.1 9.9 8.5 9.9
             
1. Food and Non-alcoholic beverages 12.1 8.8 8.4 9.1 6.7 9.5
2. Alcoholic beverages, Tobacco 9.9 11.1 7.2 11.4 4.2 10.0
3. Clothing and Footwear 6.3 9.8 8.1 5.9 11.3 7.5
4. Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 10.0 7.6 12.6 9.2 8.7 9.8
5. Furnishings, household equipment and routine household maintenance 5.0 5.1 11.8 4.2 9.7 6.3
6. Health 16.2 17.6 16.7 10.5 6.1 15.2
7. Transport 11.8 3.6 12.9 6.8 9.7 8.7
8. Communication 9.1 9.3 10.8 11.0 8.9 10.0
9. Recreation and culture 18.4 7.4 6.4 9.7 9.4 10.2
10. Education 7.2 7.9 7.6 5.7 11.0 7.1
11. Restaurants and hotels 13.8 9.7 9.6 9.2 12.7 10.5
12. Miscellaneous goods and services 12.0 10.1 10.9 19.5 11.0 13.4

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board



Table 8. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013, Annual 2011-2012
Growth Rates At Constant Prices
(In Percent)

 

  2011-2012 2012-2013 Annual 
   EXPENDITURE GROUP Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011-2012
HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE 6.9 6.6 6.7 6.2 5.1 6.6
             
1. Food and Non-alcoholic beverages 7.2 7.7 4.6 5.0 5.4 6.0
2. Alcoholic beverages, Tobacco 4.8 5.8 6.3 6.1 -2.3 5.8
3. Clothing and Footwear 2.5 4.5 2.9 0.9 3.2 2.7
4. Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 5.1 3.2 10.1 5.7 0.3 5.9
5. Furnishings, household equipment and routine household maintenance 2.7 1.6 7.1 1.1 4.6 2.9
6. Health 13.0 13.9 13.2 7.2 2.7 11.8
7. Transport 5.9 1.2 12.1 4.9 6.4 5.8
8. Communication 8.6 9.2 10.4 10.4 8.3 9.6
9. Recreation and culture 15.7 5.4 10.0 6.9 7.1 9.1
10. Education 2.3 3.1 3.0 1.2 6.4 2.3
11. Restaurants and hotels 10.4 6.3 6.1 6.0 7.5 7.1
12. Miscellaneous goods and services 7.4 12.4 5.4 13.5 6.7 9.9

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 9. NATIONAL DISPOSABLE INCOME
2009-2011
at Current Prices
(In Million Pesos)

 

  2009 2010 2011
 NATIONAL DISPOSABLE INCOME                   9,823,801             11,040,471               11,879,281
 Growth Rates (%)                             12.4                              7.6

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 10. PER CAPITA: GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT, GROSS NATIONAL INCOME,
AND HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE
1ST Quarter 2011 TO 1ST Quarter 2013

 

TYPE OF EXPENDITURE 2011 2012 2013
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
A. Estimates in current pesos                  
                   
1. GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 23,933 25,794 24,662 28,637 25,402 27,447 26,619 30,811 27,454
2. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 28,824 30,870 29,492 33,926 30,496 32,966 31,835 36,321 32,768
3. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION       EXPENDITURE 17,485 18,935 18,102 21,184 19,145 20,164 19,602 22,905 20,432
                   
B. Estimates in constant (2000) pesos                  
                   
1. GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 14,894 15,959 15,068 16,806 15,600 16,685 15,907 17,698 16,546
2. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 17,924 18,946 17,900 19,963 18,637 19,847 18,890 20,888 19,629
3. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION       EXPENDITURE 10,359 10,907 10,441 12,543 10,885 11,433 10,952 13,104 11,257
                   
C. Population* 93.6 94.0 94.4 94.8 95.2 95.6 96.0 96.4 96.8
   (million persons)                  
                   

* Per methodology advised by the NSO, the NSCB Technical Staff and the NSO computed annual and end-quarter population estimates using interpolation at decelerating rates, with the results of the 2000 and 2010 Censuses of Population and Housing (CPH) as start and end dates of the reference population. For purposes of national accounts estimation, mid-quarter population estimates are used; this is obtained by interpolating two consecutive end-quarter estimates.

 

 

Table 11. PER CAPITA: GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT, GROSS NATIONAL INCOME,
AND HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE
1ST Quarter 2010 TO 1ST Quarter 2013
Growth Rates (In Percent)

 

  2011-2012 2012-2013 Annual 
TYPE OF EXPENDITURE Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2011-2012
A. Estimates in current pesos            
             
1. GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 6.1 6.4 7.9 7.6 8.1 7.0
2. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 5.8 6.8 7.9 7.1 7.5 6.9
3. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION       EXPENDITURE 9.5 6.5 8.3 8.1 6.7 8.1
             
B. Estimates in constant (2000) pesos            
             
1. GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 4.7 4.6 5.6 5.3 6.1 5.0
2. GROSS NATIONAL INCOME 4.0 4.8 5.5 4.6 5.3 4.7
3. HOUSEHOLD FINAL CONSUMPTION        
       EXPENDITURE 5.1 4.8 4.9 4.5 3.4 4.8
             

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board

 

Table 12. GDP, GNI and NDI per capita by Income Class, 2010-2011
at Current Prices
(In Pesos)

 

2010  GDP   GNI   NDI 
 Low Income  46,237 55,733 56,698
 Middle Income  168,667 203,305 206,827
 High Income  713,678 860,239 875,144
       
2011  GDP   GNI   NDI 
 Low Income  50,039 59,792 61,241
 Middle Income  175,904 210,191 215,285
 High Income  791,173 945,388 968,299
       
Growth Rates 2010 and 2011  GDP   GNI   NDI 
 Low Income  8.2 7.3 8.0
 Middle Income  4.3 3.4 4.1
 High Income  10.9 9.9 10.6

 

 

 

Table 13. Comparison of Per Capita GDP by ASEAN Country

 

Country Name Levels
(In US Dollars)
Growth Rates (%)
2000 2005 2010 2011 2010-11
Brunei Darussalam         43,007            48,377            50,409            51,760 2.7
Cambodia               919              1,508              2,180              2,358 8.2
Indonesia           2,327              3,102              4,304              4,636 7.7
Lao PDR           1,202              1,695              2,562              2,790 8.9
Malaysia           9,423            12,011            15,183            16,051 5.7
Myanmar  -   -   -   -   - 
Philippines           2,393              3,051              3,944              4,119 4.4
Singapore         33,767            45,374            57,791            60,688 5.0
Thailand           4,876              6,675              8,500              8,646 1.7
Vietnam           1,417              2,161              3,185              3,412 7.1

- means no data available
Source: GDP per capita, PPP (current international $), World Bank
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD/countries?display=default

 

Figure 1. Comparison of Per Capita GDP by ASEAN Country

 

 

 

 

Posted: 28 June 2013


Sign up for our e-newsletter.Get the latest statistics in your mailbox!
Subscriber to our e-newsletter!

 

The PSA-Makati Central Office
is located at the Midland Buendia Bldg.,
403 Sen. Gil Puyat Ave., Makati City, Philippines

Tel. No. (632) 895-2767; Fax No. (632) 890-8456
URL: http://www.nscb.gov.ph
E-mail: info@nscb.gov.ph /nscbinfo@gmail.com

 

About Us | News | Statistics | Events || Terms of Use

Back to top


Updated 26 September 2014

Ver. 7.2014.167-09.05

1997-2014, Philippine Statistics Authority - National Statistical Coordination Board, Makati City, Philippines